ANDERSON v. J M KNITTING MILLS

Ordered that the judgment and the order are affirmed, with one bill of costs.

The record supports the Supreme Court's determination that the plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case that she sustained "serious injury" within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d). The affirmations of the plaintiff's physician consisted of conclusory allegations based on subjective complaints of pain. Summary judgment should be granted to the defendants where the plaintiff's evidence is limited to conclusory assertions tailored to meet statutory requirements (see, Lopez v. Senatore, 65 N.Y.2d 1017, 1019). Moreover, under the circumstances of this case, the court properly denied the plaintiff's motion to renew. In any event, were we to consider the "new" evidence, we would nonetheless conclude that the plaintiff did not establish a prima facie case of serious injury (see, Partlow v. Meehan, 155 A.D.2d 647). Mangano, P.J., Rosenblatt, O'Brien and Copertino, JJ., concur.