In Sinfelt v. Helm's Bros. Inc. (62 AD3d 983 [2009]) the defendants had proffered in support of its motion for summary judgment an affirmation from Sondra Pfeffer, M.D., a radiologist, who opined that "abnormalities displayed in the MRI studies of the plaintiff's cervical and lumbar spines were degenerative in origin, predated the accident and were not causally related thereto." In opposition, the plaintiff had submitted an affidavit from her treating chiropractor, Mark Snyder, D.C., who stated on the issue of causation that "the injuries sustained by the plaintiff were causally related to the motor vehicle accident of January 13, 2003 and that said injuries were consistent with the clinical presentation in my office . . . , and that the disc pathology diagnosed via MRI was causally related to the motor vehicle accident of January 13, 2003 and said findings were consistent with the clinical presentation." There was absolutely no express mention in the plaintiff's expert's affidavit of either degeneration or addressing the opinion of the defendants' radiologist which had attested to the existence of a degenerative condition. After reviewing the plaintiff's submissions in Sinfelt the Court held that the plaintiff had failed to raise an issue of fact on causation by failing to properly address the claims of degeneration. However, on the subsequent appeal the Appellate Division, Second Department, held that the plaintiff had indeed raised an issue of fact, and overturned the dismissal of the action, holding as follows: "Dr. Snyder opined, based on his contemporaneous and most recent examinations, as well as upon his review of the plaintiff's magnetic resonance imaging reports, which revealed, inter alia, disc herniations at L5-S1 and C5-6, and disc bulges at T5-6 and T6-7, that the plaintiff's lumbar and cervical injuries and observed range of motion limitations therein were permanent and causally related to the subject accident." (62 AD3d at 983-984.)