Why Trust This Analysis
This article is part of our ongoing no-fault coverage, with 271 published articles analyzing no-fault 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.
Summary judgment motions in motor vehicle accident cases often present strategic opportunities to resolve specific liability questions while leaving others for trial. This approach allows courts to efficiently address clear-cut legal issues while preserving more complex factual determinations for a jury. The Fourth Department’s decision in Potter v Stevens Van Lines illustrates this principle perfectly, showing how even straightforward rear-end collision scenarios can involve nuanced questions of causation and comparative fault.
The case also highlights the tactical considerations attorneys must weigh when crafting summary judgment motions. Rather than seeking an all-or-nothing resolution, practitioners can strategically target specific elements of a claim where the evidence strongly favors their position. This approach is particularly valuable in New York no-fault insurance cases where establishing clear liability can streamline subsequent proceedings.
Jason Tenenbaum’s Analysis:
Potter v Stevens Van Lines, Inc., 2013 NY Slip Op 06474 (4th Dept. 2013)
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.
“Plaintiff commenced this negligence action seeking damages for injuries he sustained in a motor vehicle accident. It is undisputed that plaintiff’s vehicle collided with a vehicle operated by David J. Fisk (defendant) and owned by defendant Stevens Van Lines, Inc. when plaintiff swerved to avoid Fisk’s vehicle that was entering the roadway from a driveway. ”
(1) Summary judgment granted on the issue of Defendant’s negligence, i.e., improperly backing out of the driveway
(2) Summary judgment denied as to whether Defendant’s negligence was sole proximate cause of accident.
Seems interesting the micro issues in the grander scheme of a negligence case that can be culled into a summary judgment motion. An inchoate siting of 3212(g)?
Key Takeaway
This decision demonstrates the strategic value of partial summary judgment motions in personal injury cases. While the court readily found the defendant negligent for improper backing, it preserved questions of sole proximate cause and comparative negligence for trial, showing how complex liability cases can be efficiently divided into discrete legal issues.
Legal Update (February 2026): Since this 2013 post, New York’s summary judgment standards and procedures for motor vehicle accident cases may have evolved through court decisions and rule amendments. Additionally, the interplay between no-fault insurance thresholds and comparative negligence determinations has been subject to regulatory and judicial refinements. Practitioners should verify current Civil Practice Law and Rules provisions and recent appellate decisions when developing summary judgment strategies in motor vehicle negligence cases.
Related Articles
Legal Context
Why This Matters for Your Case
New York's no-fault insurance system, established under Insurance Law Article 51, is one of the most complex insurance frameworks in the country. Every motorist must carry Personal Injury Protection coverage that pays medical expenses and lost wages regardless of fault, up to $50,000 per person.
But insurers routinely deny valid claims using peer reviews, EUO scheduling tactics, fee schedule reductions, and coverage defenses. The Law Office of Jason Tenenbaum has handled over 100,000 no-fault cases since 2002 — from initial claim submissions through arbitration before the American Arbitration Association, trials in Civil Court and Supreme Court, and appeals to the Appellate Term and Appellate Division. Jason Tenenbaum is one of the few attorneys in the state who both writes his own appellate briefs and tries his own cases.
His 2,353+ published legal articles on no-fault practice are cited by attorneys throughout New York. Whether you are dealing with a medical necessity denial, an EUO no-show defense, a fee schedule dispute, or a coverage question, this article provides the kind of detailed case-law analysis that helps practitioners and claimants understand exactly where the law stands.
About This Topic
New York No-Fault Insurance Law
New York's no-fault insurance system requires every driver to carry Personal Injury Protection (PIP) coverage that pays medical expenses and lost wages regardless of who caused the accident. But insurers routinely deny, delay, and underpay valid claims — using peer reviews, IME no-shows, and fee schedule defenses to avoid paying providers and injured claimants. Attorney Jason Tenenbaum has litigated thousands of no-fault arbitrations and court cases since 2002.
271 published articles in No-Fault
Keep Reading
More No-Fault Analysis
Car Accident Recorded Statement in New York: Should You Give One?
The at-fault driver's adjuster wants a recorded statement within days of a New York car accident — and that call is designed to weaken your case.
Apr 5, 2026
Who Pays Car Accident Medical Bills in New York? A Step-by-Step Guide
New York no-fault PIP, primary health insurance, Medicaid/Medicare, and litigation liens — the full payment ladder for car-accident medical bills.
Apr 5, 2026
Serious injury: PL 10.00(10) v. Ins Law 5102(d)
Comparison of 'serious injury' definitions between New York Penal Law 10.00(10) and Insurance Law 5102(d) in People v Garland, examining evidentiary standards.
Dec 1, 2018
Major medical carrier taken to the mat for unscrupulous conduct
Get expert legal analysis on Major medical carrier taken to the mat for unscrupulous conduct from Law Office of Jason Tenenbaum | Personal Injury Lawyers
Mar 24, 2012
The personal vehicle v. the loaner vehicle: who pays?
Understanding loaner vehicle insurance coverage in NY. Expert legal analysis of who pays for injuries. Call 516-750-0595 for free consultation.
Jun 25, 2023
Evidence: The MRI report
Analysis of MRI evidence admissibility in New York no-fault cases, examining Madia v Garcia ruling and challenges with NY's evidentiary system for personal injury practitioners.
Oct 16, 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 no-fault 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.
