Key Takeaway
Court denies lack of causal relationship motion when plaintiff was asymptomatic before motor vehicle accident, despite prior injuries and degenerative changes.
This article is part of our ongoing causation coverage, with 178 published articles analyzing causation 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.
Interesting discussion on what is probably the only way to beat a threshold motion when representing a member of the “accident of the month” club.
The EBT goes like this:
(Q) Sir, were you involved in a prior accident 6 months ago when you injured every conceivable part of your body?
(A) Yes.
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.
(Q) What pains did you have a result of the prior accident?
(A) I had pains everywhere…..(etc).
(Q) What activities couldn’t you do or do as well?
(A) (laundry list)
(Q) Immediately prior to the accident that we are here about today, how did you feel?
(A) I felt great. I was completely healed from the medically necessary aquatherapy and selective applications of the TENS unit and heat lamp that I was either given or applied myself.
(Q) What pains did you feel after the accident?
(A) (See answer to question #2)
Come up with an affidavit from someone who will dispute the degenerative findings, and you have this case:
Feaster v Boulabat, 2010 NY Slip Op 07230 (1st Dept. 2010)
“Their examining orthopedist found limitations in range of motion in plaintiff’s cervical and lumbar spines and both knees, and opined that these were attributable to degenerative changes. However, plaintiff testified that she had been asymptomatic before her car accident, and her orthopedic surgeon opined in a report submitted by defendants that plaintiff’s injuries were causally related to the accident. Moreover, defendants’ orthopedist’s opinion that, while plaintiff may have sustained injuries to her cervical and lumbar spines and left knee in the accident, these injuries had resolved, is belied by the limitations in range of motion that he found in those areas”
Related Articles
- Medical expert testimony requirements in New York personal injury cases
- How neurologist affirmations can fail to establish causal connection
- When triable issues of fact exist regarding injury causation
- Key causation lessons from summary judgment decisions
- Personal Injury
Legal Update (February 2026): Since 2010, New York’s no-fault insurance regulations and serious injury threshold standards under Insurance Law § 5102(d) may have been subject to amendments or judicial refinements. Additionally, evidentiary standards for causation determinations and procedures for threshold motions may have evolved through subsequent appellate decisions and regulatory updates, so practitioners should verify current provisions when handling similar causation disputes.
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
Causation in New York Personal Injury & No-Fault Law
Causation — proving that the defendant's negligence or the accident caused the plaintiff's injuries — is an essential element of every personal injury and no-fault claim. New York courts distinguish between proximate cause, intervening causes, and pre-existing conditions that may have been aggravated by an accident. The legal standards for establishing causation through medical evidence and the defenses available to challenge causal connection are analyzed in depth across these articles.
178 published articles in Causation
Keep Reading
More Causation Analysis
IME no-show is a policy defense triggering the hourly attorney fee provision
Learn how IME no-show defenses trigger hourly attorney fee provisions in NY no-fault insurance. Court rules failure to attend IME is policy defense.
May 22, 2021Contractual deemer
New York courts examine when out-of-state insurers can avoid no-fault coverage obligations through contractual deemer provisions and policy language analysis.
Apr 24, 2021Failure to review actual images insufficient to defeat causation MSJ
Court grants summary judgment where plaintiff's expert failed to review actual ultrasound images, only relying on reports in medical malpractice causation dispute.
Aug 10, 2017It did not work the second time around
Interboro v Johnson required factual proof for a default judgment. Jason's 2014 comparisons now include the later reversal of the Arnica ruling.
Dec 4, 2014Contract of insurance is vitiated?
New York insurance law requires timely notice of claims. When insureds fail to provide proper notice, the entire insurance contract can be voided, leaving them without coverage.
May 10, 2011Alleviation – not much alleviated
Appellate Division affirms Civil Court in Alleviation Medical v Allstate, clarifying insurer obligations for exhausted policy limits and verified claims under NY no-fault law.
Mar 22, 2021Was 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 causation 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.