Opinion
Filed June 18, 1999
Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Smith, J. — Negligence.
PRESENT: PINE, J. P., HAYES, PIGOTT, JR., HURLBUTT AND CALLAHAN, JJ.
Judgment unanimously reversed on the law without costs and new trial granted. Memorandum: At the trial of this personal injury action, defendant admitted that his negligence caused the head-on collision between plaintiffs' and defendant's vehicles. The jury returned a verdict of no cause of action based on its finding that Eleanor Burlingame (plaintiff) did not sustain a serious injury as a result of the accident ( see, Insurance Law § 5102 [d]). Supreme Court erred in denying plaintiffs' request to submit to the jury a verdict sheet containing separate interrogatories with respect to the three theories of serious injury at issue. The court instead submitted to the jury a verdict sheet containing one interrogatory that asked whether plaintiff sustained a "serious injury". Where multiple theories of serious injury are at issue, the verdict sheet should contain separate interrogatories with respect to each theory ( see, Velez v. Suehla, 229 A.D.2d 528, 530; Cirasuolo v. Cahill, 119 A.D.2d 986). We conclude that the court's error may have affected the jury's finding that plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury. We therefore reverse the judgment and grant a new trial.