Rodney v. Solntseu
Citation | 754 N.Y.S.2d 911,302 A.D.2d 442 |
Parties | DERRICK RODNEY, Appellant,<BR>v.<BR>MAKSIM SOLNTSEU et al., Respondents. |
Decision Date | 10 February 2003 |
Court | New York Supreme Court Appellate Division |
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The defendants submitted the sworn medical reports of their medical experts which established, prima facie, 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; McCauley v Ross, 298 AD2d 506). In opposition, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether he sustained such an injury, since he failed to submit competent medical evidence in admissible form (see Grasso v Angerami, 79 NY2d 813; Fisher v Williams, 289 AD2d 288; Slavin v Associates Leasing, 273 AD2d 372; Young v Ryan, 265 AD2d 547).
The plaintiff also failed to demonstrate that he was prevented from performing substantially all of the material acts which constituted his usual and customary daily activities for a period of not less than 90 days during the 180-day period immediately following the accident (see Licari v Elliott, 57 NY2d 230; Greene v Miranda, 272 AD2d 441; Buonaiuto v Shulberg, 254 AD2d 384; Ciaccio v J & R Home Improvements, 149 AD2d 558). In the absence of admissible objective evidence of injury, the plaintiff's self-serving affidavit was insufficient to raise a triable issue of fact (see Paulino v Xiaoyu Dai, 279 AD2d 619).
To continue reading
Request your trial