Jie Li v Triboro Coach Corp.
2012 NY Slip Op 05145 [96 AD3d 1013]
June 27, 2012
Appellate Division, Second Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
As corrected through Wednesday, August 1, 2012


Jie Li et al., Appellants,
v
Triboro Coach Corporation et al., Respondents.

[*1] The Flomenhaft Law Firm, PLLC, New York, N.Y. (Benedene Cannata of counsel), for appellants.

McGaw, Alventosa & Zajac, Jericho, N.Y. (James K. O'Sullivan of counsel), for respondents Triboro Coach Corporation and Marjorie R. Johnson.

Martyn, Toher & Martyn, Mineola, N.Y. (Joseph S. Holotka of counsel), for

respondent Richard Pirrera.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Orlikoff-Flug, J.), entered March 29, 2010, which, upon a jury verdict finding that the plaintiff Jie Li did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d), is in favor of the defendants and against them dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with one bill of costs to the respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs.

Contrary to the plaintiffs' contentions on appeal, the jury's finding that the plaintiff Jie Li did not sustain a serious injury under the fracture or the 90/180-day category of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) as a result of the subject accident was not contrary to the weight of the evidence (see Lolik v Big V Supermarkets, 86 NY2d 744 [1995]; Nicastro v Park, 113 AD2d 129 [1985]).

The plaintiffs' remaining contentions are without merit. Rivera, J.P., Eng, Lott and Cohen, JJ., concur.