Rivera v Gonzalez, 2013 NY Slip Op 04431 (1st Dept. 2013) Plaintiff makes marked improvements and the deteriorates. Court in the 5102(d) setting requires an explanation. “The
McDonald v Kohanfars, 2013 NY Slip Op 03821 (2d Dept. 2013) “In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal, as limited by their
Estrella v Geico Ins. Co., 2013 NY Slip Op 00173 (2d Dept. 2013) This was from last month and quite interesting. It is one of the few
Monette v Trummer, 2012 NY Slip Op 04854 (4th Dept. 2012) Does this mean the interest clock does start ticking on an MSJ victory unless Plaintiff
Tyson v Nazarian, 2012 NY Slip Op 04459 (4th Dept. 2012) I think a case like this probably explains on some level the 1% rule in
Francavilla v Doyno, 2012 NY Slip Op 04316 (2d Dept. 2012) Thomas v Independence Carting, Inc., 2012 NY Slip Op 03630 (2d Dept. 2012) Cascante v
Boone v. Milano— N.Y.S.2d —-, 2012 WL 2137382 (3d Dept.,2012) “However, Rosa failed to account for why plaintiff’s preexisting physical maladies were not the source of
Smith v. Reeves, 2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 04856 (4th Dept. 2012) “Defendants contend that the fact that plaintiff did not seek or receive any medical *2
I am putting by Bodily Injury hat on this one. There are few issues in 5102(d) land that intrigue me as much as the newest prima
Il Chung Lim v Chrabaszcz, 2012 NY Slip Op 03600 (2d Dept. 2012) 1) 13% loss of ROM not deemed a serious injury 2) The old
Cirillo v Swan, 2012 NY Slip Op 03493 (3rd Dept. 2012) “[d]efendant relied upon a sworn report from orthopedic surgeon Robert Hendler, who reviewed plaintiff’s medical
Crawford-Reese v Woodard, 2012 NY Slip Op 03502 (3d Dept. 2012) Interesting discussion on this 5102(d) topic. The evidence that Defendant presented in his 90/180 threshold
