Majority
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants Surinder Kumar and Paramjit Multani appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Ruchelsman, J.), dated March 3, 2010, which denied their motion for summary-judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them on the ground that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d).
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The Supreme Court did not err in concluding that the appellants failed to meet their prima facie burden of showing that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning
Since the appellants failed to meet their prima facie burden, it is unnecessary to consider whether the papers submitted by the plaintiff in opposition were sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact (see Smith v Hartman, 73 AD3d at 736 ; Coscia v 938 Trading Corp., 283 AD2d 538 [2001]). Covello, J.P., Angiolillo, Leventhal and Roman, JJ., concur.
Cases cited
- Toure v. Avis Rent A Car Systems, Inc. 98 NY2d 345 p. 1296
- Smith v. Hartman 73 AD3d 736 p. 1296
- Quiceno v. Mendoza 72 AD3d 669 p. 1296
- McGregor v. Avellaneda 50 AD3d 749 at 749-750 p. 1296
- Wright v. AAA Construction Services, Inc. 49 AD3d 531 p. 1296