Plaintiff appeals from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Bronx County (Robert R. Reed, J.), dated July 25, 2012, which granted defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Per Curiam.

Order (Robert R. Reed, J.), entered on or about July 25, 2012, modified to reinstate plaintiff's threshold claims with respect to the "permanent consequential limitation of use" and "significant limitation of use" categories of serious injury, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

In opposition to defendant's prima facie showing that plaintiff did not sustain a permanent consequential or significant limitation of use of his lumbar spine as a result of the underlying September 2004 vehicular accident, plaintiff raised triable issues by submitting affirmed MRI reports showing a disc herniation, as well as affirmations of his treating physician and a neurologist who repeatedly and recently measured diminished ranges of motion, and attributed his injuries to the accident (see Perl v Meher, 18 NY3d 208, 219 [2011]; Davis v Alnhmi, 96 AD3d 507 [2012]). Since defendant's moving papers did not address the causative effects, if any, of a subsequent (April 2010) motor vehicle accident in which plaintiff was involved, it was not incumbent upon plaintiff to present evidence, expert or otherwise, on the issue (see Messiana v Drivas, 85 AD3d 744 [2011]).

Plaintiff's 90/180-day serious injury claim was properly dismissed in view of his own deposition testimony that he returned to work 45 days after the 2004 accident, albeit on a reduced schedule (see Thomas v City of New York, 99 AD3D 580 [2012]; Pakeman v Karekezia, 98 AD3d 840 [2012]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.
Decision Date: January 04, 2013