Case Name: Malissa A. Rivera, Respondent, v. Russell C. Losee, Appellant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2016-04-06
Citations: 138 A.D.3d 713
Docket Number: 
Parties: Malissa A. Rivera, Respondent, v Russell C. Losee, Appellant.
Judges: Balkin, J.P., Austin, Sgroi and LaSalle, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 138
Pages: 713–713

Head Matter:
Malissa A. Rivera, Respondent, v Russell C. Losee, Appellant.
[27 NYS3d 890]

Opinion:
In an action to recover damages for
personal injuries, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Rouse, J.), dated May 1, 2015, which denied his motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) as a result of the subject accident.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The defendant, whose expert found a significant limitation in the range of motion in the lumbar region of the plaintiff's spine, failed to meet his prima facie burden of demonstrating that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) as a result of the subject accident (see Toure v Avis Rent A Car Sys., 98 NY2d 345 [2002]; Gaddy v Eyler, 79 NY2d 955, 956-957 [1992]; Mercado v Mendoza, 133 AD3d 833, 834 [2015]; Miller v Bratsilova, 118 AD3d 761 [2014]).
Since the defendant failed to meet his prima facie burden, it is unnecessary to determine whether the papers submitted by the plaintiff in opposition were sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact (see Che Hong Kim v Kossoff, 90 AD3d 969 [2011]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
Balkin, J.P., Austin, Sgroi and LaSalle, JJ., concur.