Significant limitaiton prong of Ins Law 5102(d)
June 18, 2018 No Comments
Schaubroeck v Moriarty, 2018 NY Slip Op 04453 (4th Dept. 2018) It is an obsession of mine. When someone gets into an accident where the threshold applies,
Schaubroeck v Moriarty, 2018 NY Slip Op 04453 (4th Dept. 2018) It is an obsession of mine. When someone gets into an accident where the threshold applies,
Galluccio v Grossman, 2018 NY Slip Op 03664 (2d Dept. 2018) “In opposition, the affirmation of the plaintiffs’ expert failed to raise a triable issue of fact.
Alverio v Martinez, 2018 NY Slip Op 02417 (1st Dept. 2018) In addition, defendants submitted medical reports of plaintiff’s treating physician, who found normal range of motion
Alston v Elliott, 2018 NY Slip Op 02019 (1st Dept. 2018) The feigned issue of fact (1) “In opposition, plaintiffs submitted affidavits that contradicted their sworn deposition
Giap v Hathi Son Pham, 2018 NY Slip Op 01568 (1st Dept. 2017) Since plaintiff’s own medical records showed evidence of preexisting degenerative conditions, she was required
CASE #1 Latus v Ishtarq, 2018 NY Slip Op 01417 (1st Dept. 2018) (1) “Plaintiff’s medical records demonstrated prima facie that plaintiff ceased treatment five months after
Peterson v Ward, 2017 NY Slip Op 09024 (4th Dept. 2017) “We conclude, however, that there are material issues of fact whether plaintiff’s alleged injury, i.e., a
James v Thomas, 2017 NY Slip Op 09025 (4th Dept. 2017) “Although defendants’ expert ultimately opined in his report that plaintiff’s injuries were not causally related to
Matter of Travelers Indem. Co. of Am. v McGloin, 2017 NY Slip Op 08643 (1st Dept. 2017) I put this on my facebook page because it was
Eason v Blacker, 2017 NY Slip Op 07674 (3d Dept. 2017) This is an important case because it really gives the defendant who obtains the correct records
“At the damages trial, the plaintiff testified as to his symptoms and complaints. His expert, Jerry Lubliner, who was board-certified in orthopedic surgery and sports
Eastman v Nash, 2017 NY Slip Op 06523 (2d Dept. 2017) This is any defense attorney’s nigthmare. Losing on a bulge under the significant limitation and permanent
Santos v Traylor-Pagan, 2017 NY Slip Op 05502 (1st Dept. 2017) “Plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether his carpal tunnel syndrome
Cabrera v Apple Provisions, Inc., 2017 NY Slip Op 05044 (1st Dept. 2017) As to the cervical spine claim, plaintiff’s treating physician found normal range of motion
Shehab v Powers, 2017 NY Slip Op 03790 (2d Dept. 2017) “Information in a police accident report is “admissible as a business record so long as the
Pyong Sun Yun v GEICO Ins. Co., 2016 NY Slip Op 08214 (2d Dept. 2016) (1) “At the trial, the plaintiff presented the testimony of his treating
Hojun Hwang v Doe, 2016 NY Slip Op 07610 (1st Dept. 2016) (1) “Defendant made a prima facie showing that plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury
Bobbio v Amboy Bus Co. Inc., 2016 NY Slip Op 07101 (1st Dept. 2016) (1) “[defendant] found no objective neurological disability or permanency and full range of motion
Boroszko v Zylinski, 2016 NY Slip Op 04830 (4th Dept, 2016) In the realm of a complaint seeking to breach the serious injury threshold where significant limitation
Ramjit v Motor Veh. Acc. Indem. Corp., 2016 NY Slip Op 26153 (App. Term 2d Dept. 2016) “In this action to recover for personal injuries allegedly sustained
