Peev v. Vega (28 A.D.3d 446, 2006)

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Jackson, J.), dated December 2, 2004, which granted the defendants’ 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).

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the plaintiff’s contention, the defendants established, prima facie, that he 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 [1992]). The Supreme Court properly determined that the plaintiffs submissions in opposition to the motion failed to raise a triable issue of fact. Florio, J.P., Santucci, Mastro and Rivera, JJ., concur.