Quinones v. AltmanQuinones v. Altman
Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is denied.
The defendant met his prima facie burden of showing that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of
In opposition, however, the plaintiff raised triable issues of fact as to whether he sustained serious injuries to the cervical and lumbosacral regions of his spine (see Ramkumar v Grand Style Transp. Enters. Inc., 22 NY3d 905, 906-907 [2013]; Perl v Meher, 18 NY3d 208, 215-218 [2011]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court should have denied the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Dillon, J.P., Leventhal, Chambers and LaSalle, JJ., concur.