Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, and the complaint is dismissed.
The medical reports submitted by the plaintiff, which were prepared by the plaintiff's chiropractor and physician, establish that the plaintiff did not suffer a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) (see, Pagano v Kingsbury, 182 A.D.2d 268; Rhind v Naylor, 187 A.D.2d 498; Jacondino v Lovis, 186 A.D.2d 109; Michaelides v Martone, 186 A.D.2d 544; Georgia v Ramautar, 180 A.D.2d 713, 714). Moreover, the subjective quality of the plaintiff's pain does not fall within the objective definition of serious injury as contemplated by the no fault insurance law (see, Scheer v Koubek, 70 N.Y.2d 678, 679; Rhind v Naylor, supra; Duryea v Zung, 185 A.D.2d 912; Coughlan v Donnelly, 172 A.D.2d 480; Crane v Richard, 180 A.D.2d 706, 707). Mangano, P.J., Thompson, Balletta and Lawrence, JJ., concur.