Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County (Johnny Lee Baynes, J.), entered December 12, 2005. The order granted defendants' motion for summary judgment against both plaintiffs.

Order affirmed without costs.

The affirmed medical reports submitted by defendants in support of their motion for summary judgment made out a prima facie case that each plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury pursuant to Insurance Law § 5102 (d). The reports indicated that each plaintiff had full range of motion of their cervical and lumbar spines. An unsworn report prepared by a doctor for plaintiff Dywanna L. Hall stated that she had been in four
accidents prior to the subject accident. The defendants may rely upon such unsworn medical report in support of their motion (see Fragale v Geiger, 288 AD2d 431 [2001]; Pagano v Kingsbury, 182 AD2d 269 [1992]; Scott v La Pointe, 13 Misc 3d 135[A], 2006 NY Slip Op 52036[U] [App Term, 2d & 11th Jud Dists]). Dywanna L. Hall's treating physician failed to mention the prior accidents and did not state that the subject accident caused or exacerbated an injury to Dywanna L. Hall's lower back. This shifted the burden to plaintiffs to raise a triable issue of fact (see Gaddy v Eyler, 79 NY2d 955 [1992]).

The plaintiffs unsuccessfully opposed the motion. There is nothing in the report of plaintiff Dywanna L. Hall's treating physician to indicate that he took into account the fact that [*2]she had been in four prior accidents (see Franchini v Palmieri, 1 NY3d 536 [2003]; Howell v Reupke, 16 AD3d 377 [2005]). Moreover, the plaintiffs' treating physician failed to quantify any limitation of motion of either plaintiffs' cervical spine or lumbar spine (Bennett v Genas, 27 AD3d 601 [2006]). Consequently, defendants'
motion for summary judgment was properly granted as to both plaintiffs.

Weston Patterson, J.P., Golia and Belen, JJ., concur.
Decision Date: July 24, 2007