Key Takeaway
New York court ruling on causation breaks when injury treatment is delayed 6 months after motor vehicle accident, making medical opinions speculative.
Kester v Sendoya, 2014 NY Slip Op 08379 (1st Dept. 2014)
“While plaintiff’s certified medical records may be referenced to show her complaints and the doctor’s referral for treatment (see Salman v Rosario, 87 AD3d 482, 483 n ), those records demonstrate that in the months following the February 2010 accident plaintiff sought treatment for other conditions but made no complaint of shoulder pain until June 2010. She was then referred to an orthopedist, but did not seek medical treatment for her shoulder injury until August 2010, some six months after the accident, and had an MRI performed the next month. Absent any evidence of contemporaneous, postaccident treatment or evaluation of plaintiff’s shoulder, she failed to raise an issue of fact as to whether her shoulder condition was causally related to the accident (see Henchy v VAS Express Corp., 115 AD3d 478, 479 ; Rosa v Mejia, 95 AD3d 402 ). Furthermore, the affirmed report of her orthopedic surgeon, who first examined plaintiff a year after the accident, was insufficient to raise an issue of fact”
The failure to treat for a particular condition (or to show evidence of same) for 6 months following the motor vehicle accident will break the chain of causation and render an opinion on causation as speculative. This is the extension and really what the Appellate Term meant when it reversed Amato.
Related Articles
- [Medical expert testimony requirements in NY personal injury cases](How Medical Expert Testimony Can Make or Break Your NY Personal Injury Case)
- [Neurologist’s insufficient affirmation regarding causal connection](Neurologist’s Insufficient Affirmation: Understanding Causal Connection in Personal Injury Cases)
- [Summary judgment standards for causation in personal injury claims](Affirmed, Reversed, and Modified on Summary Judgment: Key Causation Lessons)
- [When triable issues exist regarding causal relationship to accidents](Triable issue of fact found as to the issue of whether an injury was causally related to a motor vehicle accident)
- Personal Injury
Legal Update (February 2026): Since this 2014 post, New York courts have continued to refine the standards for establishing causation in no-fault and personal injury cases, particularly regarding gaps in treatment and medical documentation requirements. Practitioners should verify current case law developments and any updated evidentiary standards that may affect causation analysis in cases involving delayed treatment or diagnosis.
