Case Name: James Murtha, Respondent, v. Diane Kalhorn, Appellant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1997-03-24
Citations: 237 A.D.2d 496
Docket Number: 
Parties: James Murtha, Respondent, v Diane Kalhorn, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 237
Pages: 496–497

Head Matter:
James Murtha, Respondent, v Diane Kalhorn, Appellant.
[656 NYS2d 905]

Opinion:
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Stark, J.), dated June 12, 1996, which denied his motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The plaintiff met his burden of demonstrating the existence of factual issues with respect to whether he suffered a "serious injury" within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d). The medical reports from the plaintiff's treating physicians and the more recent report submitted by the plaintiff's treating chiropractor present objective quantified evidence of the extent or degree of limitation with respect to the use of the plaintiff s dorso-lumbar spine and the duration of the limitation (see, Bates v Peeples, 171 AD2d 635; Swenning v Wankel, 140 AD2d 428). Miller, J. P., Thompson, Joy and Luciano, JJ., concur.