LUCKEY v. BAUCH

In support of their motion for summary judgment, the defendants submitted a transcript of the plaintiff's deposition testimony and copies of her medical records ( see Hodges v. Jones, 238 AD2d 962). When considered with the affirmed medical reports of their examining orthopedist and neurologist, the defendants' evidence was sufficient to make a prima facie showing that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) ( see Toure v. Avis Rent A Car Sys., 98 NY2d 345; Gaddy v. Eyler, 79 NY2d 955).

The burden therefore shifted to the plaintiff to come forward with "competent admissible medical evidence," based on objective findings, sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact that she sustained a serious injury ( McLoyrd v. Pennypacker, 178 AD2d 227, 228). The plaintiff failed to meet her burden. The plaintiff submitted numerous inadmissible, unsworn medical reports ( see Pagano v. Kingsbury, 182 AD2d 268; Grasso v. Angerami, 79 NY2d 813, 814), which her expert improperly relied upon in making his diagnosis ( see Friedman v. U-Haul Truck Rental, 216 AD2d 266, 267). Moreover, the affirmed medical report of her expert failed to adequately account for the injuries to the plaintiff's neck and back as a result of two other motor vehicle accidents, one which occurred before the subject accident, and one which occurred subsequent to the subject accident ( see Rogers v. Chiarelli, 10 AD3d 355; McNeil v. Dixon, 9 AD3d 481, 482-483; Omar v. Goodman, 295 AD2d 413, 414-415).

Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. concur.