Opinion
2003-02657.
Decided March 15, 2004.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Slavin, J.H.O.), entered November 4, 2002, which, after an inquest, dismissed the complaint on the ground that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102(d).
Solomon Rosengarten, Brooklyn, N.Y., for appellant.
Cheven, Keely Hatzis, New York, N.Y. (Mayu Miyashita of counsel), for respondent.
Before: MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P., GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN, GLORIA GOLDSTEIN WILLIAM F. MASTRO, JJ.
DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
Contrary to the plaintiff's contention, the issue of whether he sustained a serious injury was properly decided at the inquest. The order granting his unopposed motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability did not determine that issue ( see Reid v. Brown, 308 A.D.2d 331; Zecca v. Riccardelli, 293 A.D.2d 31).
The Supreme Court's determination that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102(d) was based upon a fair interpretation of the evidence and should not be disturbed ( see Mechwart v. Mechwart, 292 A.D.2d 354; Nado v. State of New York, 220 A.D.2d 397).
ALTMAN, J.P., KRAUSMAN, GOLDSTEIN and MASTRO, JJ., concur.