Antorino v. MordesAntorino v. Mordes
—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Gowan, J.), dated April 14,
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
We agree with the Supreme Court’s conclusion that the plaintiff failed to establish a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d). The only admissible medical evidence proffered by the plaintiff in opposition to the defendant’s motion was an affidavit from her treating physician (see, Grasso v Angerami,
In addition, the physician’s assertion that the plaintiff continued to experience restriction of motion in her lower back directly contradicts the same physician’s prior finding that the plaintiffs lumbosacral range of motion was "near full” with only "mild tenderness” in the surrounding musculature. It is clear, therefore, that the conclusory assertions of the plaintiff’s treating physician were tailored to meet the statutory requirements and are unsupported by any objective medical proof (see, Dubois v Simpson, supra; Georgia v Ramautar,