Appeal by plaintiff from so much of an order of the Civil Court, Kings County (K. Rothenberg, J.), entered January 16, 2004, granting her motion vacating a prior order, entered November 13, 2002, granting summary judgment to defendants on default, as, upon vacatur, adhered to so much of the earlier order granting them summary judgment.

Order insofar as appealed from affirmed without costs.

In seeking summary judgment dismissing the action, the affirmed medical reports submitted by defendant Dantzler and defendants A & A Locomotion, Inc. and Guinter made out a prima facie showing that 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 motion papers were insufficient to raise a triable issue of fact. Plaintiff's doctor did not refer to plaintiff's previous accident which had occurred eight months earlier wherein she had injured many of the same parts of her body. Moreover, plaintiff's doctor did not provide an objective medical basis to support his conclusions (see Franchini v Palmieri, 1 NY3d 536 [2003]).

Pesce, P.J.and Golia, J., concur. [*2]

Patterson, J., taking no part.
Decision Date: February 02, 2005