Plaintiff appeals from an order of the Civil Court, Bronx County (Julia I. Rodriguez, J.), entered June 18, 2004, which granted the motion of defendant Kingsley Mariano for summary judgment dismissing the complaint upon the ground that plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury.

PER CURIAM:

Appeal from order (Julia I. Rodriguez, J.), entered June 18, 2004, deemed an appeal from the judgment, same court and Judge, entered August 16, 2004, which dismissed the complaint as against defendant Mariano, and so considered, the judgment is affirmed, without costs.

Defendant met his burden of proof by submitting medical evidence that plaintiff did not suffer a serious injury as defined in Insurance Law §5102[d] (see Copeland v. Kasalica, 6 AD3d 253 [2004]; McNair v. Ofori, 198 AD2d 47 [1993]).

In response, plaintiff failed to come forward with evidence sufficient to raise a triable issue that he suffered a serious injury (see Thompson v. Abbasi, 15 AD3d 95 [2005]). "Proof of a herniated disc, without additional objective medical evidence establishing that the accident resulted in significant physical limitations, is not alone sufficient to establish a serious injury" (Pommells v. Perez, 4 NY3d 566, 574 [2005]; see also Cortez v. Manhattan Bible Church, 14 AD3d 466 [2005]). Plaintiff offered no affirmations from treating doctors based upon examinations in the near aftermath of the accident (see Robinson v. Grecian Transport, 278 AD2d 90 [2000]). There was a seven year gap' in treatment that ended only at the time of the summary judgment motion (see Beaubrun v. N.Y. City Transit Authority, 9 AD3d 258 [2004]). Plaintiff's chiropractor failed to address evidence that plaintiff's condition was degenerative in [*2]origin, nor did he respond to defendant's expert's opinion that the diagnoses of plaintiff's doctors were inconsistent with the results of objective tests (see
Shaw v. Looking Glass Associates, 8 AD3d 100 [2004]).

This constitutes the decision and order of the court.
Decision Date: March 22, 2006