DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
In support of their motion, the defendants submitted the affirmed medical reports of their examining orthopedist and neurologist, which stated that, upon examination, both plaintiffs had full range of motion in the cervical, thoracic, and lumbosacral spines, and each plaintiff's neurological examination indicated that his condition was normal. This proof was sufficient to establish a prima facie case that neither plaintiff sustained a serious injury as a result of the accident despite evidence of bulging and herniated discs (see Elfiky v. Harris, 301 A.D.2d 624; Fauk v. Jenkins, 301 A.D.2d 564; Duldulao v. City of New York, 284 A.D.2d 296, 297).
In opposition to the motion, the plaintiffs submitted the affirmations of a physician, which improperly relied upon the unsworn medical reports of another physician (see Rozengauz v. Lok Wing Ha, 280 A.D.2d 534, 535; Decayette v. Kreger Truck Renting, 260 A.D.2d 342, 343; Merisca v. Alford, 243 A.D.2d 613, 614). Those affirmations failed to provide evidence of the extent or degree of the plaintiffs' physical limitations and their duration (see Barbeito v. Kesev Taxi, 281 A.D.2d 379, 380; Zuckerman v. Karagjozi, 247 A.D.2d 536; Beckett v. Conte, 176 A.D.2d 774) or a qualitative assessment of the plaintiffs' conditions (see Toure v. Avis Rent A Car Sys., 98 N.Y.2d 345).
FLORIO, J.P., S. MILLER, TOWNES and MASTRO, JJ., concur.