Key Takeaway
Ferrara allowed corrected medical proof on renewal in 2010. Compare the former affirmation rule with current CPLR 2106 and later renewal decisions.
This article is part of our ongoing procedural issues coverage, with 190 published articles analyzing procedural issues issues across New York State. Attorney Jason Tenenbaum brings 24+ years of hands-on experience to this analysis, drawing from his work on more than 1,000 appeals, over 100,000 no-fault cases, and recovery of over $100 million for clients throughout Nassau County, Suffolk County, Queens, Brooklyn, Manhattan, and the Bronx. For personalized legal advice about how these principles apply to your specific situation, contact our Long Island office at (516) 750-0595 for a free consultation.
Last reviewed: September 2026
The plaintiff in Ferrara fixed the form of his medical proof and obtained renewal. The corrected papers defeated summary judgment. They did not establish a serious injury as a matter of law.
Legal Update (September 2026): The signer restriction applied in Ferrara is no longer the current rule: CPLR 2106 permits qualifying perjury affirmations by any person; the renewal guide separately addresses why corrected papers may still fail.
What the court allowed
In Ferrara v De Ming Song, 28 Misc 3d 138(A) (App Term, 2d, 11th & 13th Jud Dists 2010), the plaintiff first opposed summary judgment with an affirmation from a Florida physician who was not licensed in New York. Under the version of CPLR 2106 then in force, the court rejected that submission and granted the defendant’s motion.
Free Consultation · No Fee Unless We Win
Does this apply to your situation?
Every case is different. Get a free, confidential case review from an experienced attorney who can tell you exactly where you stand.
The plaintiff renewed with an affidavit sworn before a Florida notary and the physician’s reports. The court allowed renewal and denied summary judgment, subject to a costs condition. The appellate court affirmed the grant of leave to renew. The defendant had not raised a form objection to the new submissions.
Correct form and an explanation
The point for a present-day motion is the explanation for the earlier papers. Joyous in 2026 rejected renewal despite corrected translations because the prior omission was not reasonably justified.
For a covered statement, current CPLR 2106 provides a perjury-affirmation alternative. Its specified exceptions still matter, including depositions and certain oaths. It does not establish the medical merits of the statement.
Connect to the Encyclopedia
- CPLR 2221: governing rule and related decisions
- Provek: explaining an employment-date mistake
- Ashraf Ashour: replacing companion-case papers
- Dookhie: answering an opponent’s new reply argument
- Abrams: diligence after a missing witness was located
- Terio: late reargument while an appeal was pending
For review of a particular motion record or an attorney referral, contact the Law Office of Jason Tenenbaum.
Legal Context
Why This Matters for Your Case
New York law is among the most complex and nuanced in the country, with distinct procedural rules, substantive doctrines, and court systems that differ significantly from other jurisdictions. The Civil Practice Law and Rules (CPLR) governs every stage of civil litigation, from service of process through trial and appeal. The Appellate Division, Appellate Term, and Court of Appeals create a rich and ever-evolving body of case law that practitioners must follow.
Attorney Jason Tenenbaum has practiced across these areas for over 24 years, writing more than 1,000 appellate briefs and publishing over 2,353 legal articles that attorneys and clients rely on for guidance. The analysis in this article reflects real courtroom experience — from motion practice in Civil Court and Supreme Court to oral arguments before the Appellate Division — and a deep understanding of how New York courts actually apply the law in practice.
About This Topic
Procedural Issues in New York Litigation
New York civil procedure governs every stage of litigation — from pleading requirements and service of process to motion practice, discovery deadlines, and trial procedures. The CPLR creates strict procedural rules that can make or break a case regardless of the underlying merits. These articles examine the procedural pitfalls, timing requirements, and strategic considerations that practitioners face in New York state courts, with a particular focus on no-fault insurance and personal injury practice.
190 published articles in Procedural Issues
Keep Reading
More Procedural Issues Analysis
How to Talk to a Judge in New York: What to Say, What to Avoid, and How to Present Yourself
Address the judge as 'Your Honor,' stand when you speak, wait to be recognized, and keep answers short and honest. A Long Island trial lawyer explains.
Feb 24, 2026
CPLR § 2106 Amendment Eliminates Affidavit Notarization Requirement: What This Means for New York Litigation
New York's CPLR 2106 permits affirmations in place of many sworn documents. See the 2024 and 2025 changes, exceptions, and historical case notes.
Feb 18, 2026
Attorney Fee Requirements in New York No-Fault Insurance Cases
Learn about attorney fee requirements in New York no-fault insurance cases after Cornell Medical. Important billing compliance for NYC and LI attorneys.
May 29, 2009
Supplemental affirmation on a DJ case acceptable and res judicata mandates dismissal of complaint
Court rules supplemental affirmation acceptable in DJ case and res judicata mandates dismissal of no-fault complaint after prior declaratory judgment ruling.
Aug 29, 2014
Understanding CPLR 2106 Expert Report Requirements: Critical Analysis for Long Island Attorneys
Quality Psychological: the former psychologist-affirmation restriction, deficient oath attestation, and why both summary judgment motions failed.
Jan 18, 2013
3211(a)(1) – does not apply to an EUO no-show defense
Court rules CPLR 3211(a)(1) cannot establish policy violation defenses in no-fault cases, highlighting the need for strategic motion practice in busy NYC courts.
Sep 8, 2010Was this article helpful?
Disclaimer: This article is published by the Law Office of Jason Tenenbaum, P.C. for informational and educational purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice, and no attorney-client relationship is formed by reading this content. The legal principles discussed may not apply to your specific situation, and the law may have changed since this article was last updated.
New York law varies by jurisdiction — court decisions in one Appellate Division department may not be followed in another, and local court rules in Nassau County Supreme Court differ from those in Suffolk County Supreme Court, Kings County Civil Court, or Queens County Supreme Court. The Appellate Division, Second Department (which covers Long Island, Brooklyn, Queens, and Staten Island) and the Appellate Term (which hears appeals from lower courts) each have distinct procedural requirements and precedents that affect litigation strategy.
If you need legal help with a procedural issues matter, contact our office at (516) 750-0595 for a free consultation. We serve clients throughout Long Island (Huntington, Babylon, Islip, Brookhaven, Smithtown, Riverhead, Southampton, East Hampton), Nassau County (Hempstead, Garden City, Mineola, Great Neck, Manhasset, Freeport, Long Beach, Rockville Centre, Valley Stream, Westbury, Hicksville, Massapequa), Suffolk County (Hauppauge, Deer Park, Bay Shore, Central Islip, Patchogue, Brentwood), Queens, Brooklyn, Manhattan, the Bronx, Staten Island, and Westchester County. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
