THOMPSON v. KATZ

ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The defendants made a prima facie showing that the injured plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102(d) as a result of the subject motor vehicle accident ( see Toure v. Avis Rent A Car Sys., 98 N.Y.2d 345; Gaddy v. Eyler, 79 N.Y.2d 955). The affirmations of the injured plaintiff's physician submitted in opposition to the defendants' motion failed to establish that any of the identified limitations in movement were of a significant nature ( see Trotter v. Hart, 285 A.D.2d 772; Williams v. Ciaramella, 250 A.D.2d 763; Cabri v. Myung-Soo Park, 260 A.D.2d 525; Waldman v. Dong Kook Chang, 175 A.D.2d 204; Medina v. Zalmen Reis and Assocs., 239 A.D.2d 394).

Accordingly, the defendants were entitled to summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

PRUDENTI, P.J., FLORIO, H. MILLER, SCHMIDT and COZIER, JJ., concur.