Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
The plaintiff's proof in opposition to the defendant's motion consisted entirely of unsworn medical reports from the plaintiff's physicians and the plaintiff's own sworn affidavit. Unsworn medical reports are not admissible in opposition to a motion for summary judgment based on the plaintiff's failure to establish "serious injury" within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) (see, Grasso v. Angerami, 79 N.Y.2d 813; Pagano v Kingsbury, 182 A.D.2d 268). Standing alone, the plaintiff's affidavit consisted of nothing more than subjective complaints of pain, which are not sufficient to establish "serious injury" within the meaning of the statute (see, Scheer v. Koubek, 70 N.Y.2d 678; Dubois v. Simpson, 182 A.D.2d 993; Cesar v. Felix, 181 A.D.2d 852; Spezia v. De Marco, 173 A.D.2d 462; Bates v. Peeples, 171 A.D.2d 635). The trial court, therefore, properly granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment and properly dismissed the complaint. Thompson, J.P., Rosenblatt, Ritter, Friedmann and Krausman, JJ., concur.