Appeal by defendants from an order of the Civil Court, Kings County

(A. Schack, J.), dated June 19, 2003, which denied their motion for summary judgment.

Order unanimously reversed without costs and defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint granted.

The affirmed medical reports submitted by defendants' medical experts in support of their motion for summary judgment made out a prima facie case that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury pursuant to Insurance Law § 5102 (d). This shifted the burden to plaintiff to raise a triable issue of fact (see Gaddy v Eyler, 79 NY2d 955 [1992]).

The plaintiff's opposition papers failed to raise a triable issue of fact. She failed to submit medical proof contemporaneous with the accident showing any initial range of motion restrictions in her spine (see Ifrach v Neiman, 306 AD2d 380 [2003]). The plaintiff also failed to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether her injuries prevented her from performing substantially all of her customary and usual activities during at least 90 of the first 180 days following the accident (Francis v Christopher, 302 AD2d 425 [2003]).
Decision Date: May 04, 2004