SHAFARENKO v. CHENG

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the plaintiff's contention, the issue of whether he sustained a serious injury was properly decided at the inquest. The order granting his unopposed motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability did not determine that issue ( see Reid v. Brown, 308 A.D.2d 331; Zecca v. Riccardelli, 293 A.D.2d 31).

The Supreme Court's determination that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102(d) was based upon a fair interpretation of the evidence and should not be disturbed ( see Mechwart v. Mechwart, 292 A.D.2d 354; Nado v. State of New York, 220 A.D.2d 397).

ALTMAN, J.P., KRAUSMAN, GOLDSTEIN and MASTRO, JJ., concur.