Eisenberg v. Guzman

Defendant established his entitlement to judgment as a matter of law as to plaintiffs claims of “significant limitation” and “consequential limitation” of use of his anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) of his left knee. Although defendant’s orthopedist found a loss of range of motion in plaintiffs left knee in 2009, defendant’s radiologist found no evidence of an ACL tear on the MRI taken of the left knee after the subject accident (see Linton *506v Nawaz, 62 AD3d 434, 439 [1st Dept 2009], affd on other grounds 14 NY3d 821 [2010]).

Plaintiff’s opposition failed to raise a triable issue of fact. Even…