Case Name: Vincent Lagana, Respondent, v. Saeid Shamsian, Defendant, and Clinton Barrow et al., Appellants. (And a Third-Party Action.)
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2000-03-13
Citations: 270 A.D.2d 313
Docket Number: 
Parties: Vincent Lagana, Respondent, v Saeid Shamsian, Defendant, and Clinton Barrow et al., Appellants. (And a Third-Party Action.)
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 270
Pages: 313–313

Head Matter:
Vincent Lagana, Respondent, v Saeid Shamsian, Defendant, and Clinton Barrow et al., Appellants. (And a Third-Party Action.)
[704 NYS2d 287]

Opinion:
—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants Clinton Barrow and New York Methodist Hospital appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Douglass, J.), entered March 23, 1999, which, after a nonjury trial, is in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendants in the principal sum of $45,000.
Ordered that the notice of appeal from an order of the same court dated January 27, 1999, is deemed a premature notice of appeal from the judgment (see, CPLR 5520 [c]); and it is further,
Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, and the complaint is dismissed; and it is further,
Ordered that the appellants are awarded one bill of costs.
The plaintiff's evidence was legally insufficient to demonstrate that he sustained a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d). The plaintiff's subjective complaints of pain in his arm and shoulder were insufficient to demonstrate the existence of a serious injury (see, Scheer v Koubek, 70 NY2d 678, 679; Carroll v Jennings, 264 AD2d 494).
The plaintiff's expert physician, a neurologist who did not consider himself to be an expert in shoulder injuries, testified that the plaintiff's alleged shoulder injury prevented him from performing his usual activities for at least 90 of the 180 days immediately following the occurrence. This testimony was improperly based upon the plaintiff's subjective complaints of pain (see, Crandall v Sledziewski, 260 AD2d 754). O'Brien, J. P., Friedmann, Florio and Schmidt, JJ., concur.