DAVID v. EZ RATE RENTAL CORPORATION

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the appellant's contention, the jury verdict finding that he did not sustain a serious injury, as defined by Insurance Law § 5102(d), was not against the weight of the credible evidence (see Lolik v. Big V Supermarkets, 86 N.Y.2d 744; Scicutella v. Town of Hempstead, 287 A.D.2d 611). Here, the jury was presented with conflicting opinions of medical experts, and we refuse to disturb its determination with respect to the credibility of those experts (see Kalpakis v. County of Nassau, 289 A.D.2d 453; Moreno v. Chemtob, 271 A.D.2d 585; Gray v. McParland, 255 A.D.2d 359).

FEUERSTEIN, J.P., SMITH, FRIEDMANN and ADAMS, JJ., concur.