Ramkumar v Grand Style Transp. Enters. Inc., 2012 NY Slip Op 02597 (1st Dept. 2012) Plaintiff in a 5102(d) action must prove that (s)he was cut
Hedgecock v Pedro, 2012 NY Slip Op 02005 (4th Dept. 2012) Four accidents and a court having to discern which accidents are sufficient to sustain a
Harrity v Leone, 2012 NY Slip Op 01933 (4th Dept. 2012) “Plaintiff, however, raised an issue of fact with respect to those two categories by submitting
Pearson v Miles, 2012 NY Slip Op 50423(U)(App. Term 2d Dept. 2012) “The Civil Court found that, in opposition to the motion, plaintiff had raised a
Jun Suk Seo v Walsh, 2011 NY Slip Op 01619 (2d Dept. 2011) This is the big decision of the week as far as I am
Mahmood v Vicks, 2011 NY Slip Op 00653 (2d Dept. 2011) Call this one: why an MRI performed more than 6 weeks after the MVA is
Cheour v Pete & Sals Harborview Transp., Inc., 2010 NY Slip Op 06614 (2d Dept. 2010) “While Dr. Farkas stated that the plaintiff presented with “extreme
Abdalla v Mazl Taxi, Inc., 2010 NY Slip Op 06071 (2d Dept. 2010) There is nothing wrong with relying on a party’s opponents to help establish
Travis v Batchi, 2010 NY Slip Op 05862 (1st Dept. 2010) “The examination records of plaintiff’s own treating physician/expert show that she had full strength and
Urban Radiology, P.C. v Tri-State Consumer Ins. Co., 2010 NY Slip Op 50987(U)(App. Term 2d Dept. 2010) This case really should be in the misc.3d reporter
In support of the plaintiff’s [respondent’s] cross motion, she relied upon, inter alia, Dr. Westreich’s affirmation, which was sufficient to meet her prima facie burden of
In support of the plaintiff’s [respondent’s] cross motion, she relied upon, inter alia, Dr. Westreich’s affirmation, which was sufficient to meet her prima facie burden of
