CHAPLIN v. TAYLOR

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly denied the defendants' motion. A Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the plaintiff's cervical spine and lower back shows a posterior herniated disc at C4-5. A disc herniation may constitute a serious injury within the meaning of the Insurance Law (see, Flanagan v. Hoeg, 212 A.D.2d 756, 757; Boehm v. Estate of Mack, 255 A.D.2d 749). The defendants failed to demonstrate that the herniation was not causally related to the subject accident. Accordingly, the defendants failed to make a prima facie case for judgment as a matter of law. Under these circumstances, we need not consider whether the plaintiff's papers were sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact (see, Mariaca-Olmos v. Mizrhy, 226 A.D.2d 437).