Significant limitation v. permanent consequential, again
New York court ruling creates apparent contradiction in no-fault threshold requirements for significant limitation vs. permanent consequential limitation cases.
Read More →5102(d) issues
89 articles by Jason Tenenbaum, Esq.
NY Serious Injury Threshold: When Suboptimal Effort Derails Personal Injury Cases
Learn how NY's serious injury threshold works and why suboptimal effort can destroy your personal injury case. Expert Long Island attorney guidance. Call 516-750-0595.
Read More →
Understanding Self-Imposed ROM Limitations in Personal Injury Cases: What New York Plaintiffs Need to Know
Learn how NY courts handle self-imposed ROM limitation claims in personal injury cases. Expert legal guidance. Call 516-750-0595 for free consultation.
Read More →
NY 5102(d) Serious Injury Threshold: Appeals and Notice Best Practices
Master NY 5102(d) serious injury threshold appeals & notice requirements. Expert analysis of appellate best practices. Call 516-750-0595 for help.
Read More →
The need for contemporaneous records
Second Department clarifies that contemporaneous medical examinations aren't required to defeat summary judgment motions under Insurance Law § 5102(d).
Read More →
NY No-Fault Insurance: Serious Injury Threshold vs Medical Necessity
Expert analysis of NY no-fault insurance law: how serious injury thresholds intersect with medical necessity. Ampofo case insights. Call 516-750-0595.
Read More →
NY Economic Loss Recovery: When Serious Injury Threshold Not Required
Learn when you can recover economic losses over $50K without proving serious injury under NY law. Expert Long Island attorneys. Call 516-750-0595 free consult.
Read More →
Gap in treatment analyzed
Court ruling clarifies that gaps in medical treatment only matter for causation issues when defendants fail to establish prima facie lack of causation in serious injury claims.
Read More →
Mr. Ortega, why did you lie to us?
Ortega v Healthcare Services Group case analysis - plaintiff's incomplete disclosure of health history leads to jury verdict favoring defendant on causation and damages.
Read More →
Another must read in the battle involving “significant limitation” and “permanent consequential”
Tejada v LKQ case analysis: Court finds triable issue for significant limitation but not permanent consequential limitation in lumbar spine injury claim.
Read More →
The recent examination
New York court case highlights critical requirement for physicians to specify objective testing methods when measuring range of motion in no-fault threshold injury claims.
Read More →
20% deficit is a serious injury
Court ruling establishes that a 20% deficit in cervical spine flexion constitutes a serious injury under New York's no-fault insurance threshold requirements.
Read More →
Court of Appeals upholds dismissal of a 5102(d) case (4-3)
NY Court of Appeals affirms dismissal of 5102(d) case in Rosa v Delacruz - plaintiff's medical evidence failed to address causation issues with rotator cuff tears.
Read More →
Causation on a degeneration
Court ruling shows how plaintiffs can overcome preexisting condition defenses in personal injury cases by proving conditions were asymptomatic before the accident.
Read More →
Second Department once again now recognizes a gap in treatment as a basis to non-suit Plaintiffs
Second Department follows First Department precedent, making gaps in medical treatment a viable defense against personal injury threshold claims again.
Read More →
Second Department recognizes degeneration as a basis to move for summary judgment
Second Department clarifies that degenerative findings can support summary judgment dismissal when plaintiffs fail to adequately rebut pre-existing condition evidence.
Read More →
1.5 million dollar scope and post-concussive injury
$1.5M jury award upheld for bus accident victim with cervical/lumbar disc injuries, torn menisci, and post-concussive syndrome under NY Insurance Law 5102(d).
Read More →
Significant limitaiton prong of Ins Law 5102(d)
Analysis of significant limitation prong under Insurance Law 5102(d) in Schaubroeck v Moriarty, examining causation requirements and threshold standards.
Read More →
Out of scope – out of mind
Appellate court ruling on expert witness qualifications in personal injury cases - physicians must establish foundation when testifying outside their specialty area.
Read More →
Gap in treatment and inconsistent findings
Analysis of Alverio v Martinez case highlighting how gaps in treatment and inconsistent medical findings can defeat serious injury claims under Insurance Law 5102(d).
Read More →
Feigned issue of fact coupled with cessation of treatment
NY court case on feigned issue of fact when plaintiffs contradict deposition testimony about cessation of treatment in personal injury claims.
Read More →
“trauma increase the rate of disc dessication”
Court ruling shows how medical testimony linking trauma to accelerated disc degeneration can overcome preexisting condition defenses in personal injury cases.
Read More →
Cessation of treatment/Pre-existing injuries/Commentary
NY court ruling on cessation of treatment and pre-existing injuries in personal injury cases. Analysis of burden shifting and causation requirements.
Read More →
Was the femur broken in the accident?
Court highlights credibility issues when plaintiff claims femur fracture but walks unassisted post-accident, creating factual disputes in no-fault threshold cases.
Read More →
The cited to report raised an issue of fact
New York court finds defendant's expert report created fact issues by relying on plaintiff's medical records showing accident-related injuries and limited range of motion.
Read More →
Oh somebody had a bad day.
Court case highlights attorney malpractice risks in SUM claims when settling without insurer consent, emphasizing professional duty requirements.
Read More →
The injuries are “not-related” peer review in a 5102(d) case
Court accepts peer review in 5102(d) case where defendant successfully challenges causation claims using medical records showing no ACL injury and delayed treatment.
Read More →
An expert who saw plaintiff once may testify
New York court rules on expert witness testimony limits for non-treating physicians in personal injury cases involving spine and knee injuries.
Read More →
The $200,000 bulge
Defense attorney's nightmare: $200,000 jury verdict for bulge disc under NY no-fault law's significant limitation and permanent consequential limitation prongs.
Read More →
Very interesting discussion on Perl
Santos v Traylor-Pagan analysis: carpal tunnel causation fails without contemporaneous treatment under Perl standard in NY personal injury threshold cases
Read More →
Mild, minor, slight
New York Court of Appeals case analysis on serious injury threshold: when mild deficits and full range of motion doom personal injury claims under Insurance Law 5102(d).
Read More →
Police report and CPLR 4518(a)
Police report admissibility under CPLR 4518(a) business records exception in personal injury cases - when officer observations are required vs inadmissible witness statements.
Read More →
SUM jury verdict sustained
Court upholds jury verdict denying serious injury claim despite plaintiff's shoulder surgery and medical testimony in GEICO insurance dispute.
Read More →
Serious injury, causation and the ability to recover
Court ruling shows how lack of causation in knee injury claims can bar recovery even when serious injury threshold is met for other injuries.
Read More →
Causation not proved
Court dismisses personal injury case where plaintiff failed to prove causation between car accident and cervical injuries, distinguishing new trauma from preexisting neck condition.
Read More →
5102(d) baseline under an aggravation and exacervbation
How defendants can defeat 5102(d) serious injury threshold claims under aggravation and exacerbation theories - Boroszko v Zylinski case analysis
Read More →
A Wagman/Bradshaw foundation is necessary for EMG/NCV results
Appellate court ruling requires proper foundation for EMG/NCV electrodiagnostic test reports in personal injury cases under Wagman/Bradshaw standard.
Read More →
90/180 from the Fourth Department
The Fourth Department clarifies what evidence plaintiffs need to defeat 90/180 threshold summary judgment motions in no-fault cases, emphasizing objective medical findings and activity restrictions.
Read More →
Degeneration was not really that
Court ruling shows how plaintiffs can prove degenerative spine conditions became actionable injuries after car accidents, even with pre-existing asymptomatic degeneration.
Read More →
The $1,000,000 herniation
Million-dollar herniation verdict upheld: Bronx jury awards $1M for cervical discs and lumbar herniations with permanent pain requiring surgery and spinal stimulator.
Read More →
Dr. Dov
Dr. Dov Berkowitz's courtroom antics caught on tape create serious implications for personal injury cases and no-fault insurance claims involving medical experts.
Read More →
Suspended physician
Court rules that a physician's medical affirmation remains admissible even after license revocation, as long as the affirmation was executed while licensed.
Read More →
Interesting discussion as to causation
New York court dismisses injury case where plaintiff failed to prove accident caused knee surgery, highlighting importance of objective medical evidence in causation claims.
Read More →
Significant limitation v. Permanent consequential
Key differences between significant limitation vs permanent consequential limitation in NY serious injury cases, including expert requirements and proof standards.
Read More →
The missing EMG/NCV undermined the expert’s analysis
Expert testimony undermined in 5102(d) serious injury case when EMG/NCV study missing critical conclusion page showing radiculopathy - Fourth Department analysis
Read More →
Triable issue of causation established
Court establishes triable issue of fact on causation in personal injury case, highlighting importance of medical expert testimony and comparative MRI evidence.
Read More →
The inability to recall which shoulder was hurt damages the plaintiff’s case
In Fludd v Pena, a plaintiff's inability to recall which shoulder was injured and failure to complain about shoulder pain at IME severely damaged their case.
Read More →
Permanent consequential v. Significant limitaton – the value of early surgery
Analysis of Sutliff v Qadar case examining permanent consequential vs significant limitation standards under 5102(d), highlighting the importance of early surgical intervention for personal injury claims.
Read More →
An interesting dissent on a 5102(d) case
Appellate Term dissent in Vale v Floyd highlights critical errors in proving serious injury under Insurance Law 5102(d), including failure to establish normal range of motion baselines.
Read More →
Surgery was done so well that plaintiff lost his day in court
New York court dismisses serious injury claim after successful shoulder surgery restored full range of motion, highlighting how effective medical treatment can defeat no-fault threshold cases.
Read More →![Peer report is sufficient to prima facie prove lack of serious injury (Ins Law Sec. 5102[d])](https://cdn.jtnylaw.com/blog/peer-report-is-sufficient-to-prima-facie-prove-lack-of-serious-injury-ins-law-sec-5102d.avif)
Peer report is sufficient to prima facie prove lack of serious injury (Ins Law Sec. 5102[d])
Fourth Department ruling confirms peer review expert reports can establish prima facie defense against serious injury claims under NY Insurance Law Section 5102(d).
Read More →
Cessation of treatment and its interplay with no-fault fraud?
Court ruling on cessation of no-fault treatment - when plaintiffs must prove benefit termination and reasonable explanation for stopping therapy in 5102(d) cases.
Read More →
Inconsistency between chiropractor report and MRI reports spells the end of personal injury plaintiff’s claim
Court dismisses personal injury case when chiropractor's findings contradicted MRI results showing normal spine images with no disc damage.
Read More →
Range of motion measurements do not require an instrument
New York court clarifies that orthopedic surgeons can measure range of motion without instruments for no-fault insurance threshold determinations.
Read More →
A Prima facie showing of lack of serious injury does not require a review of plaintiff’s records
New York court ruling confirms insurance medical experts don't need to review all plaintiff records to establish prima facie case for lack of serious injury.
Read More →
Defense expert states that injury aggravated pre-existing condition – yet jury verdict dismissing claim affirmed
NY court affirms jury verdict dismissing personal injury claim despite defense expert testimony that accident aggravated plaintiff's pre-existing back condition.
Read More →
The jury could not find under a reasonable view of the evidence that plaintiff failed to sustain a serious injury under 5102(d)
Court overturns jury verdict finding no serious injury under Insurance Law 5102(d) when plaintiff proved rotator cuff tear with significant range of motion loss.
Read More →
Deterioration in the 5102(d) setting must be explained
In NY no-fault cases, medical experts must explain any deterioration after improvement to meet the serious injury threshold under Insurance Law 5102(d).
Read More →
Causation speculative after trial; 4404(a) motion granted and $200,000 jury verdict vacated
Court vacates $200,000 jury verdict in personal injury case due to speculative causation evidence, granting defendants' CPLR 4404 motion after trial.
Read More →
Serious Injury Law: Permanent Consequential vs. Significant Limitation in Long Island & NYC Cases
Expert analysis of Estrella v Geico serious injury case. Learn the crucial differences between permanent consequential and significant limitations in Long Island & NYC personal injury law. Call 516-750-0595.
Read More →
There is something in that Rochester water.
Fourth Department ruling in Monette v Trummer clarifies that liability includes serious injury determination under Insurance Law 5102(d) for personal injury cases.
Read More →
Proof of exacerbation insufficient in 5102(d) case to defeat summary judgment motion
Court rules insufficient proof of exacerbation cannot defeat summary judgment in NY serious injury threshold case. Fourth Department analysis of pre-existing conditions.
Read More →
Another liability appeal…
Personal injury attorney Jason Tenenbaum examines recent liability appeals and challenges the legal maxim about summary judgment being rarely granted in negligence cases.
Read More →
Causation speculative – failure to rebut doctor
Medical experts must address preexisting conditions when establishing causation in personal injury cases, or risk dismissal for speculative testimony.
Read More →
10-month initial gap renders causality speculative
A 10-month gap in medical treatment following an auto accident rendered causation claims speculative, highlighting the importance of continuous care documentation.
Read More →
90/180 claim has serious consequences despite 5102(d) dismissal of permanent consequential and significan limitation
New York no-fault law creates paradoxical situations where courts dismiss serious injury claims yet allow full damages under 90/180 day categories, highlighting systemic inconsistencies.
Read More →
Perl? Where are you? Not over here…
Court ruling on 13% range of motion loss not qualifying as serious injury under NY no-fault law, requiring radiologist report rebuttals in personal injury cases.
Read More →
Permanent consequential and Significant Limitation non-suited despite Perl
Third Department case analysis where permanent consequential and significant limitation claims failed despite Perl precedent due to inadequate medical proof and causation issues.
Read More →
90/180 discussion – interpretation of Perl.
Crawford-Reese v Woodard case analysis: 90/180 threshold motion requirements, medical evidence standards, and Perl interpretation for NY serious injury law.
Read More →
5102(d) and a dissent discussing "no-fault"
Court ruling on 5102(d) serious injury claims requiring proof of no-fault exhaustion and inability to pay medical bills, with dissenting opinion analysis.
Read More →
They call her crash
Court analysis of four accidents determining which qualify for serious injury under 5102(d), examining significant limitation vs permanent consequential categories.
Read More →
What are objective signs of continuing disability?
Court case examines objective medical tests for proving continuing disability in personal injury cases, including EMG tests, straight leg tests, and muscle spasm documentation.
Read More →
A bad day for Mr. Pearson
Pearson v Miles demonstrates how failing to properly allege the 90/180 day injury category in a bill of particulars can doom a no-fault threshold case.
Read More →
The injury was serious and not pre-existing because the medical necesity of the surgery was not challenged
Landmark NY case analysis: How medical necessity affects serious injury thresholds in personal injury cases. Expert legal representation in Long Island & NYC.
Read More →
Strategic MRI Timing in Personal Injury Cases: Why Later Can Be Better
Expert analysis of strategic MRI timing in NY personal injury cases. Learn why delayed imaging can be better. Long Island & NYC attorneys. Call 516-750-0595.
Read More →
Exageration of symptoms beats a threshold motion
New York court ruling shows that medical experts claiming symptom exaggeration must provide objective evidence to support their conclusions in no-fault threshold cases.
Read More →
They sunk their own battleship
Personal injury defendants must carefully review medical records before using them as evidence, as plaintiff's own treating physician reports can backfire and establish serious injuries.
Read More →
A signifcant knee surgery does not defeat the 5102(d) serious injury threshold
Court rules knee surgery including ACL reconstruction doesn't meet NY serious injury threshold when medical records show full strength and range of motion post-surgery.
Read More →
The destruction of peer hearsay: It is not hearsay – and much more
Examining peer hearsay exceptions in NY no-fault cases, medical record admissibility, and verification procedures in Urban Radiology v Tri-State Consumer.
Read More →
A Plaintiff's own hospital records defeated his own threshold summary judgment motion
Court examines how plaintiff's own hospital records contradicted expert testimony in no-fault threshold case, creating triable issues of fact.
Read More →
Causation, Renewal and a probable trip to the Court of Appeals
Henry v Peguero 2010 case analysis examining causation requirements in 5102(d) serious injury threshold claims, renewal motions, and potential Court of Appeals review.
Read More →
Causation defense rebuffed – notice the subtleties of this case
Court case highlights crucial distinction between reviewing MRI reports versus actual films when defending against causation claims in personal injury cases.
Read More →
Court of Appeals tells the Appellate Division to adjudicate 5102(d) motions as either "all or nothing"
Court of Appeals rules 5102(d) threshold motions must be decided "all or nothing" - once plaintiff proves any serious injury category, entire motion fails.
Read More →
Knee Surgery for ACL and Meniscus Tears: Understanding the Serious Injury Threshold in New York Personal Injury Cases
Learn why knee surgery for ACL and meniscus tears may not automatically meet NY serious injury threshold. Expert legal analysis from Long Island personal injury lawyers.
Read More →
An IME doctor must offer an explanation why he believes a Claimant's diminished range of motion is self restricted
Learn how Kim v O'Rourke established standards requiring IME physicians to provide objective evidence when claiming range of motion limitations are self-restricted.
Read More →
An interesting 5102(d) case involving a knee surgery
Expert analysis of Gilmonio v Toussaint 5102(d) case involving knee surgery. Learn how incomplete medical history can defeat serious injury threshold claims in NY.
Read More →
First Department Legal Decisions: Impact on No-Fault Practice and New York Legal Practitioners
First Department decisions impact no-fault insurance practice, criminal law, and negligence cases for NY attorneys. Analysis of Garcia v Leon hearsay ruling.
Read More →
No-Fault Insurance Claims: Causation Requirements and Economic Loss Recovery in New York
Expert analysis of no-fault insurance causation requirements and economic loss recovery in New York. Serving Long Island and NYC. Call (516) 750-0595.
Read More →
5102(d) – What NOT to Do: Critical Mistakes That Can Destroy Your Personal Injury Case
Avoid critical mistakes that destroy 5102(d) personal injury cases in NY. Learn what NOT to do from experienced Long Island attorneys. Call 516-750-0595 for expert guidance.
Read More →