Manon v. Doucoure

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Sallie ManzanetDaniels, J.), entered December 17, 2007, which granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that plaintiff did not sustain a “serious injury” within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d), unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Defendants established prima facie that plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury of either a permanent or a nonpermanent nature by submitting medical evidence indicating that his spinal and shoulder injuries had resolved within two months after the accident (see Toure v Avis Rent A Car Sys., 98 NY2d 345 [2002]). In opposition, plaintiff failed to adequately explain the three-year gap in his treatment (see Pommells v Perez, 4 NY3d 566, 574 [2005]). As to the “90/180” category, plaintiff failed to support his claim with objective evidence of a “medically determined injury or impairment of a non-permanent nature” (Insurance Law § 5102 [d]; Toure at 357). Concur—Gonzalez, J.P., Sweeny, Renwick and Freedman, JJ.