SOTO v. FOGG

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court correctly granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment. The defendant established a prima facie case that the injured plaintiff did not suffer a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) ( see, Gaddy v. Eyler, 79 N.Y.2d 955). The injured plaintiff's subjective complaints of pain, as contained in her affidavit submitted in opposition to the defendant's motion, without more, were insufficient to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether she sustained a serious injury ( see, Scheer v. Koubek, 70 N.Y.2d 678; Lincoln v. Johnson, 225 A.D.2d 593; Orr v. Miner, 220 A.D.2d 567).

We note that the Magnetic Resonance Imaging report submitted by the plaintiffs was not in admissible form, and therefore, should not be considered on the instant motion ( see, Grasso v. Angerami, 79 N.Y.2d 813, 814; Gleason v. Huber, 188 A.D.2d 581; Craft v. Brantuk, 195 A.D.2d 438).

Rosenblatt, J. P., O'Brien, Sullivan, Krausman and Florio, JJ., concur.