Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The defendants met their prima facie burden of showing that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) as a result of the subject accident ( see Toure v Avis Rent A Car Sys., 98 NY2d 345; Gaddy v Eyler, 79 NY2d 955, 956-957). In opposition, the plaintiff raised a triable issue of fact as to whether she sustained a serious injury to her cervical spine under the permanent consequential limitation of use or the significant limitation of use category of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) ( see Evans v Pitt, 77 AD3d 611; Tai Ho Rang v Young Sun Cho, 74 AD3d 1328; Acosta v Rubin, 2 AD3d 657).