Plaintiff appeals from an order of the Civil Court, New York County, entered November 6, 2003 (Eileen A. Rakower, J.) granting defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

PER CURIAM:

Order entered November 6, 2003 (Eileen A. Rakower,
J.) affirmed, with $10 costs.

Plaintiff's evidence in opposition to defendant's motion for summary judgment did not raise an issue that she sustained a "serious injury" when hit by defendant's car (Insurance Law § 5102[d]). The record shows that plaintiff's own doctors found her injuries to be "mild", minor and not permanent (see Licari v Elliott, 57 NY2d 230 [1982]). The treating doctors, consulted at least six months after the accident, failed to offer a sufficient qualitative or quantitative assessment of the extent of the alleged limitations of movement (see Toure v Avis Rent A Car Systems, Inc., 98 NY2d 345 [2002]; Suarez v Abe, 4 AD3d 388 [2004]). Plaintiff's submission also lacked objective findings of restriction contemporaneous with the accident (see Thompson v [*2]Abbasi, 15 AD3d 95 [2005], Toulson v Young Han Pae, 13 AD3d 317 [2004]). Finally, plaintiff did not submit competent medical evidence that she was unable to perform "substantially all" of her "material" daily activities for at least 90 of the 180 days immediately following the accident (Insurance Law § 5102[d]; see Berk v Lopez, 278 AD2d 156 [2000]).

This constitutes the decision and order of the court.
Decision Date: May 31, 2005