Key Takeaway
New York court ruling on MUA expert testimony qualifications in no-fault insurance cases, examining when medical experts can testify outside specialty areas.
Drew De Marco, P.C. v Allstate Ins. Co., 2013 NY Slip Op 52212(U)(App. Term 1st Dept. 2013)
“uring Dr. Portnoy’s redirect testimony, the trial court precluded the witness from testifying as an expert on MUA procedures based on his acknowledgment that he was not certified to perform MUA. The Court thereupon directed a verdict in favor of plaintiff.”
“Dr. Portnoy was qualified as a chiropractic expert. Thus, he need not have been certified as an MUA specialist to offer an opinion as to the medical necessity of the MUA procedures here at issue (see Matter of Solano v City of Mount Vernon, 108 AD3d 676, 677 ). His lack of certification in this area goes to the weight to be accorded his testimony, not its admissibility (see Borawski v Huang, 34 AD3d 409, 410 ).” New trial ordered.
This was the situation in Solano:
“Here, the hearing officer’s determination is supported by substantial evidence. The petitioner first contends that Dr. Silverman was not qualified to give an opinion. However, we have held that, “nce a medical expert establishes his or her knowledge of the relevant standards of care, he or she need not be a specialist in the particular area at issue to offer an opinion” (Texter v Middletown Dialysis Ctr., Inc., 22 AD3d 831, 831 ). Here, upon stipulation, Dr. Silverman was qualified as a medical expert. Thus, he need not have been a specialist to offer an opinion as to the petitioner’s condition. Moreover, contrary to the petitioner’s arguments, Dr. Silverman’s testimony was consistent and supported by the medical evidence. The hearing officer was free to credit Dr. Silverman’s testimony more than the testimony of the petitioner’s treating physician and chiropractor”
So, even though Dr. Portnoy does not engage in voodoo MUA, his testimony could establish a prima facie lack of medical appropriateness if his testimony is consistent and supported my medical evidence. I think Solano is something to look into in the arbitration context when someone other than Cerf, Sposta or Sntkoff is your expert.
Related Articles
- Understanding expert testimony requirements in medical necessity disputes
- When conclusory affidavits fail in medical necessity summary judgment motions
- First Department’s approach to medical necessity in no-fault insurance cases
- How IME doctors must explain their findings regarding self-restricted range of motion
- New York No-Fault Insurance Law
Legal Update (February 2026): Since this 2013 decision, New York’s regulations governing expert witness qualifications and testimony regarding medical procedures like MUA may have been modified through regulatory amendments or updated court precedents. Practitioners should verify current admissibility standards and expert qualification requirements, as evidentiary rules and medical necessity determination procedures are subject to periodic revision.
