Reyes v. Diaz

Mar 8, 2011
Versions:82 A.D.3d 484
917 N.Y.S.2d 632
917 N.Y.2d 632

Defendants failed to make a prima facie showing that plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d). Defendants’ orthopedic surgeon failed to indicate the objective tests used to determine the range of motion in plaintiff‘s hip. Defendants failed to offer any expert opinion addressed to plaintiff‘s claimed psychological injuries (see Offman v Singh, 27 AD3d 284 [2006]). In addition, the opinion of defendants’ radiologist that plaintiff‘s herniation was degenerative was “too equivocal to satisfy defendant[s‘] prima facie burden to show that such herniation was not caused by a traumatic event” (Glynn v Hopkins, 55 AD3d 498, 498 [2008]).

In view of the foregoing, we need not consider the sufficiency of plaintiff‘s opposition (see Winegrad v New York Univ. Med. Ctr., 64 NY2d 851, 853 [1985]). Concur—Andrias, J.P., Catterson, Moskowitz, Abdus-Salaam and Román, JJ.