MERLIS v. LUPO

Order affirmed, with costs.

Viewing the record in the light most favorable to plaintiff, the party opposing the motion for summary judgment ( Waldron v Wild, 96 A.D.2d 190), we conclude that plaintiff's claim of "serious injury" within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) presents a question of fact to be resolved by a jury ( see, Licari v Elliott, 57 N.Y.2d 230; Friends of Animals v Associated Fur Mfrs., 46 N.Y.2d 1065). Mangano, J.P., Bracken, Weinstein and Niehoff, JJ., concur.