Key Takeaway
Personal injury attorney Jason Tenenbaum examines recent liability appeals and challenges the legal maxim about summary judgment being rarely granted in negligence cases.
The landscape of personal injury litigation in New York continues to evolve, particularly when it comes to summary judgment motions in negligence cases. While traditional legal wisdom suggests that summary judgment is rarely appropriate in personal injury matters, recent appellate decisions reveal a more nuanced reality. For attorneys handling personal injury cases, understanding how courts apply summary judgment standards becomes crucial for developing effective litigation strategies.
The intersection of liability determinations and New York’s No-Fault Insurance Law creates unique challenges for practitioners. When cases involve threshold issues under Insurance Law Article 51, the complexity increases significantly, as attorneys must navigate both liability questions and no-fault coverage requirements simultaneously.
Jason Tenenbaum’s Analysis:
Francavilla v Doyno, 2012 NY Slip Op 04316 (2d Dept. 2012)
Thomas v Independence Carting, Inc., 2012 NY Slip Op 03630 (2d Dept. 2012)
Cascante v Kakay, 2011 NY Slip Op 07488 (1st Dept. 2011)
For whatever the reason, I seem to be writing an increasing amount of personal injury appeals. I am unsure how this happened, but it has been an interesting change. Yet, ironically, I seem to remain in the confines of Article 51 of the Insurance Law.
What I am learning is that the old maxim that “It is well recognized that summary judgment is a drastic remedy and is rarely granted in negligence actions” is but a misnomer. Zawadzki v Knight, 155 A.D.2d 870 (1979).
Key Takeaway
The traditional belief that summary judgment is rarely granted in negligence cases may no longer hold true in practice. As demonstrated through recent appellate experience, courts are increasingly willing to grant summary judgment in personal injury cases, particularly when dealing with threshold issues under New York’s No-Fault Insurance Law. This shift requires attorneys to adapt their litigation strategies accordingly.
