Why Trust This Analysis
This article is part of our ongoing evidence coverage, with 163 published articles analyzing evidence 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.
Medical records often present complex evidentiary challenges in personal injury litigation, particularly when dealing with hearsay objections and certification requirements. The First Department’s decision in Ward v Lincoln Electric Co. offers practitioners a potentially streamlined approach to introducing medical records into evidence without the typical procedural hurdles.
This ruling addresses a common courtroom scenario where defendants seek to introduce a plaintiff’s medical records to support their case, but face obstacles related to business records authentication and hearsay restrictions. The decision provides clarity on when uncertified medical records may be admissible despite traditional evidentiary barriers.
The court’s reasoning focuses on the plaintiff’s response to the records rather than complex hearsay analysis, potentially offering attorneys a more direct path to admissibility in similar cases involving expert testimony and medical documentation.
Jason Tenenbaum’s Analysis:
Ward v Lincoln Elec. Co., 2014 NY Slip Op 02668 (1st Dept. 2014)
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.
I think this might be a way around the Appellate Term peer hearsay paradigm without stating that Assignor’s medical records are not considered for a hearsay purpose. Assignee is stuck with Assignor’s uncertified records unless Assignor disputes their accuracy. This seems to be a cleaner approach to allow these records into evidence than our current construct.
“Plaintiff’s uncertified medical records may be considered since plaintiff does not dispute their accuracy or veracity (Carlton v St. Barnabas Hosp., 91 AD3d 561 ; CPLR 4518). He only disputes the inferences to be drawn from the records as to the date on which his condition was sufficiently apparent to start the limitations period running”
Key Takeaway
The Ward decision establishes that when a plaintiff doesn’t challenge the accuracy or veracity of their medical records, those records become admissible even without proper certification. This creates a practical workaround for evidentiary issues that typically plague the introduction of medical documentation, shifting focus from hearsay objections to the plaintiff’s own acknowledgment of record reliability.
Legal Update (February 2026): Since this 2014 post, CPLR 4518 and related evidence rules governing medical record admissibility may have been subject to amendments or clarifying decisions. The standards for authentication and hearsay exceptions in personal injury cases have continued to evolve through appellate decisions. Practitioners should verify current provisions of CPLR 4518 and recent case law developments regarding uncertified medical records admissibility.
Related Articles
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
Evidentiary Issues in New York Litigation
The rules of evidence determine what information a court or arbitrator may consider in deciding a case. In New York no-fault and personal injury practice, evidentiary issues arise constantly — from the admissibility of business records and medical reports to the foundation requirements for expert testimony and the application of hearsay exceptions. These articles examine how New York courts apply evidentiary rules in insurance and injury litigation, with practical guidance for building admissible evidence at every stage of a case.
163 published articles in Evidence
Keep Reading
More Evidence Analysis
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
Expert Witness in Car Accident Lawsuits
Learn how expert witnesses in New York car accident lawsuits help establish fault, causation, and damages through accident reconstruction, medical testimony, and economic analysis.
May 14, 2025
Failed to adduce that (s)he was an expert
New York court ruling on expert witness qualification requirements - what must be included in expert affidavits and CVs to establish admissibility in personal injury cases.
Dec 4, 2014
A very impressive win.
NYU-Hospital v Esurance: Court rules on defective no-fault denial forms and business records defense in New York insurance law case with timely filing issues.
May 31, 2011
Understanding Medical Necessity Defense Failures in New York No-Fault Insurance Cases
Learn how medical necessity defenses fail in NY no-fault cases. Expert analysis of Progressive Med v Allstate reveals key evidentiary pitfalls & hearsay issues.
Feb 18, 2010
Hearsay – business records
People v Jones court decision on business records hearsay exception - printout evidence admission requirements and foundational standards under CPLR 4518.
Feb 5, 2018Was 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 evidence 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.
