Reset A A Font size: Print

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Shawnqueia HALL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. GALA TRADE 2000 LTD., et al., Defendants-Respondents.

Decided: October 21, 2004

TOM, J.P., SULLIVAN, WILLIAMS, FRIEDMAN, MARLOW, JJ. Levine & Slavit, New York (Gerald G. Arze of counsel), for appellant. Geoghan Cohen & Bongiorno, LLC, New York (Eric J. Kuperman of counsel), for respondents.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Milton A. Tingling, J.), entered July 15, 2003, which granted defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint for lack of a serious injury as required by Insurance Law § 5102(d), unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff failed to overcome defendants' prima facie showing of entitlement to summary judgment by providing evidence to demonstrate that the injuries she allegedly sustained in the accident resulted in a “significant limitation of use of a body function or system” (see Gaddy v. Eyler, 79 N.Y.2d 955, 957, 582 N.Y.S.2d 990, 591 N.E.2d 1176 [1992] ).   An expert's conclusion that limitations in motion are permanent is not sufficient absent objective evidence of the severity of the asserted physical limitations (see Arjona v. Calcano, 7 A.D.3d 279, 776 N.Y.S.2d 49 [2004];  Noble v. Ackerman, 252 A.D.2d 392, 394, 675 N.Y.S.2d 86 [1998] ).