HEWAN v. CALLOZZO

Plaintiffs' claims that they were unable to resume daily activities for 90 out of the 180 days following the accident are simply not supported by any proof of confinement, incapacity, or other substantial curtailment of daily activities sufficient to make out a prima facie showing of serious injury ( see, Licari v Elliott, 57 N.Y.2d 230, 236, 238-239). Nor do plaintiffs' affidavits or that of their doctor, based on subjective complaints of pain, demonstrate any permanent injuries ( see, Velez v Cohan, 203 A.D.2d 156).

Concur — Ellerin, J.P., Rubin, Nardelli, Tom and Mazzarelli, JJ.