Defendants appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Bronx County (Fernando Tapia, J.), entered April 17, 2006, which denied their motion for summary judgment dismissal of the complaint.

PER CURIAM:

Order (Fernando Tapia, J.), entered April 17, 2006, affirmed, with $10 costs.

Plaintiff's medical evidence was sufficient to raise an issue of fact as to whether she sustained serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law 5102(d). The affirmation of plaintiff's treating physician, based upon five examinations of plaintiff over nearly two years beginning shortly after the accident, includes his findings of persistent, quantified restrictions of motion which he compared to the normal range (see Silva v. Vizcarrondo, 31 AD3d 292 [AD1, 2006]). The clinical findings were supported by positive results of MRI and nerve conduction tests, which were referred to by defendant's expert and therefore, were properly before the court (see Ayzen v Melendez, 299 AD2d 381 [2002]). The cessation of active treatment was reasonably explained (see Pommells v. Perez, 4 NY3d 566, 574 [2005]).

While sustaining the action upon the aforementioned grounds, we note that the evidence does not disclose the existence of a triable issue as to whether plaintiff, by reason of injuries sustained in the accident, was prevented from performing "substantially all" of the material acts constituting her usual and customary activities for 90 of the first 180 days following the accident.

This constitutes the decision and order of the court.
Decision Date: January 18, 2007