Key Takeaway
Personal injury defendants must carefully review medical records before using them as evidence, as plaintiff's own treating physician reports can backfire and establish serious injuries.
In New York personal injury litigation, defendants frequently rely on a plaintiff’s own medical records to argue that injuries don’t meet the “serious injury” threshold required under Insurance Law § 5102(d). This strategy can be highly effective when the records show minimal or routine findings. However, as demonstrated in this 2010 case, defendants must exercise extreme caution when selecting which medical documents to submit as evidence.
The case of Abdalla v Mazl Taxi, Inc. serves as a stark reminder that a plaintiff’s own hospital records can sometimes work against the defense’s interests. When medical records contain evidence of significant injuries or limitations, using them as defense exhibits can actually help establish the plaintiff’s case rather than undermine it.
Jason Tenenbaum’s Analysis:
Abdalla v Mazl Taxi, Inc., 2010 NY Slip Op 06071 (2d Dept. 2010)
There is nothing wrong with relying on a party’s opponents to help establish your prima facie defense that threshold was not breached or a service lacked medical utility. But, as this case shows, watch what you annex to your motions, lest you wish to lose right out of the gate.
“The defendants, in support of their motion, relied on some of the plaintiff’s own medical reports. One such report was that of the plaintiff’s treating physician, Dr. Joyce Goldenberg, which revealed the existence of a significant limitation in the plaintiff’s right knee flexion (see Guerrero v Bernstein, 57 AD3d 845; Mendola v Demetres, 212 AD2d 515). The other was an operative report of the plaintiff’s treating orthopedic surgeon, Dr. Richard Seldes, which revealed, inter alia, the existence of a tear in the posterior horn of the medial meniscus in the right knee. Since the defendants did not meet their prima facie burden, it is unnecessary to determine whether the papers submitted by the plaintiff in opposition were sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact”
Can you say sianara?
Key Takeaway
Defense attorneys must thoroughly review all medical records before submitting them as evidence in threshold motions. Even though using a plaintiff’s own medical records is a valid strategy, records that document significant limitations or surgical findings can establish rather than defeat serious injury claims. Understanding what constitutes objective signs of continuing disability is crucial for effective case evaluation and motion practice.
Legal Update (February 2026): Since this 2010 post, New York courts have continued to refine the standards for evaluating “serious injury” threshold motions under Insurance Law § 5102(d), and there have been subsequent appellate decisions that may affect how medical records are evaluated in summary judgment proceedings. Practitioners should verify current case law interpretations and any potential amendments to threshold analysis standards when crafting litigation strategy around plaintiff medical records.
