Ordered that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs payable to the defendants appearing separately and filing separate briefs.
The defendants separately moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them, on the ground that the plaintiff failed to sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d), and that the plaintiff's medical records established that his complaints were pre-existing. In opposition to the defendants' motion papers, which established prima facie that they were entitled to judgment as a matter of law, the plaintiff submitted no medical evidence to support his allegation that an exacerbation and/or acceleration of his pre-existing injuries was causally related to the subject accident (see, Nadrich v. Woodcrest Country Club, 250 A.D.2d 827; Zuckerman v. Karagjozi, 247 A.D.2d 536; Weaver v. Derr, 242 A.D.2d 823; Antoniou v. Duff 204 A.D.2d 670). Accordingly, summary judgment was properly granted to the defendants dismissing the complaint.
Bracken, J. P., Thompson, Goldstein and McGinity, JJ., concur.