PEREZ v. EINHORN

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The defendant moved for summary judgment on the ground that the plaintiff had not sustained a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law former § 671 (4) (now § 5102 [d]). The plaintiff's papers submitted in opposition to the motion, including an affidavit of his treating physician, indicating a limitation of his back movement to 70% of normal, were sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact and defeat the motion (see, Lopez v Senatore, 65 N.Y.2d 1017). Mangano, J.P., Thompson, Brown and Rubin, JJ., concur.