TRANTEL v. ROTHENBERG

ORDERED that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is denied, and the complaint is reinstated.

A magnetic resonance image of the plaintiff's lumbar spine, which was submitted by the defendant, showed a bulging disc at L4-L5. The defendant failed to establish, on the motion for summary judgment, that the bulge was not causally related to the subject accident. Further, an affirmed report of a neurologist who examined the plaintiff specified degrees of limitation in her range of motion. Accordingly, the defendant failed to make out a prima facie case of its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, and it is therefore unnecessary to consider whether the plaintiff's papers were sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact (see, Lewis v. White, 274 A.D.2d 455; Dillon v. Thomas, 266 A.D.2d 183).

RITTER, J.P., ALTMAN, McGINITY, SMITH and COZIER, JJ., concur.