Evidence & Trial Practice
Case notes on proof at trial: admissibility, foundations, directed verdicts, post-trial motions and keeping a case on the calendar.
99 articles from 2008–2026 · 1 current · 4 reviewed case notes · by Jason Tenenbaum
Current articles
Articles the firm treats as current: published since 2024, or older and re-checked against today's law. Most recently published or reviewed first.
- CPLR § 2106 Amendment Eliminates Affidavit Notarization Requirement: What This Means for New York Litigation Reviewed Sep 11, 2026 · first published 2026
New York's CPLR 2106 permits affirmations in place of many sworn documents. See the 2024 and 2025 changes, exceptions, and historical case notes.
Reviewed case notes by year
Notes on decisions from earlier years that the firm has re-read against current law. Each note states when it was last reviewed and what has changed since.
Older archive
Case notes as they were written at the time. They have not been re-checked against later decisions, so treat them as history and confirm the current rule before relying on one.
2020 (1)
2019 (5)
- When the trial court in a bench trial does not assess credibility
- Understanding Proximate Cause in New York Medical Malpractice Cases: Essential Elements for Success
- New York Note of Issue: Avoiding Pitfalls in Personal Injury Cases
- How much error is harmless?
- NY Insurance Subpoena Enforcement and Fair Hearing Rights
2018 (4)
2017 (5)
2016 (3)
2015 (8)
- Case Erroneously Marked 'Settled' on eCourts: CPLR 2104 and the Motion to Restore
- Put on a case at your own risk after the Plaintiff rests
- CPLR 3101 Disclosure: When an Undisclosed Witness Can Still Testify at Trial
- Sanctions and a very annoyed court
- The Reply that introduced a proper reply was itself proper
- Civil judgments cannot be used to question a party’s credibility
- The Arbitrator Charles Sloane 2106 rule: deemed arbitrary.
- Signature Authentication Requirements in New York Criminal Trials: Foundation Rules for Impeachment
2014 (13)
- Failed to adduce that (s)he was an expert
- The Missing Document Charge in New York: Proving the Document Existed Before Seeking an Adverse Inference
- Those tax returns
- Hearsay
- Another 3101(d) case
- CPLR 3101(d) not violated
- Jules said he is not bound by the Appellate Term’s holdings
- The absence of an expert is fatal to prove causation
- Speak your mind in the wrong forum? It will cost you. Fail to supervise your employees? A price will be paid.
- Plaintiff’s medical records are admissible by defendant absent dispute regarding accuracy or veracity
- Marked-Off Cases in New York Civil Court: Why CPLR 3404 Dismissal Does Not Apply
- Another peer hearsay case
- Attorney drafted 3101(d) in malpractice action insufficient to defeat summary judgment
2013 (5)
- Evidentiary issues in what appeared to be a personal grudge match at the 4th Department
- And why do you think the signature was stamped?
- Judgment as a matter of law due to opening statement
- No credentials? No issue of fact
- Peer Hearsay in No-Fault Trials: Experts May Testify From the Medical Records They Reviewed
2012 (8)
- Best evidence and the failure to tab exhibits
- Oral application granted (untimely papers accepted) and the deeming acceptable of an affirmation of a physician in a different specialty
- 3404 and 3216 collide – well somewhat
- Right to confrontation trumps HIPPA
- Judicial Notice of the New York E-Courts Website: When Courts May Rely on Online Records
- Civil Court overturns Appellate Term precedent
- Objected to inadmissible proof spells doom
- A Case and Reserves That Will Remain in Limbo: Understanding New York No-Fault Insurance Law
2011 (10)
- Another really intelligent appeal
- An psychologist can base his testimony off his own unsworn report – are you really surprised?
- Present Sense Impression, Refreshing Recollection, and Inconsistent Statements in New York
- Another Article 10 case wittles away peer hearsay
- Dr. Grinsberg is incompetent to testify as a matter of law
- Attacking an expert based upon his religion leads to reversal
- The Critical Role of Medical Literature in Expert Testimony
- Civil Court Decisions in No-Fault Insurance: When Legal Reasoning Goes Wrong | Long Island Attorney
- Post-Notice of Trial Calendar Issues: Avoiding Procedural Limbo in NY Courts
- Understanding Article 10 Evidentiary Issues: Expert Witness Testimony and Hearsay Rules in New York Courts
2010 (20)
- Very interesting discussion involving a nurse’s standard of care in the medical malpractice realm
- Smolinski v Smolinski: Fourth Department Reverses $44 Million Verdict, Orders Fourth Trial
- CPLR 3101(d) Expert Disclosure Strikes: Why Pre-Trial Rulings Are Not Appealable
- An Expert's Opinion Based Upon Hearsay Is Allowable in an Article 10 Mental Health Hearing
- Failure to appear for trial allows the complaint to be dismissed WITH prejudice
- Analysis or reference to scientific data is necessary to defeat a motion based upon the lack of causal connection between lead paint and attendant poisoning
- Peer hearsay: Play it again Sam
- Peer doctor's testimony is sufficient to prima facie demonstrate a service's lack of medical necessity
- Expert evidence necessary to address malpractice claim
- When Can a New York Jury Reject Expert Testimony? Guidelines from Williams v City of New York
- A less than credible Plaintiff sinks his own case
- An expert can testify about the standard of care of a "sub-specialist" in appropriate cases
- Expert Qualification Standards in New York No-Fault Cases: Understanding Professional Sufficiency Requirements
- An expert's opinion that relies on an unsworn MRI report constitutes competent evidence
- Expert Competency and Medical Literature in New York Medical Malpractice and No-Fault Cases
- Understanding Medical Necessity Defense Failures in New York No-Fault Insurance Cases
- Physical Therapist Expert Testimony Limitations in New York Personal Injury Cases
- Assignor Admissions in New York No-Fault: When Your Client’s Own Words Work Against Them
- Affirmation of opposing expert sufficient to thwart summary judgment in a malpractice case
- Proof That Physician Was Internist Sufficient for Expert Medical Testimony in NY Personal Injury Cases
2009 (11)
- How Medical Experts Become Qualified to Testify in New York Courts
- What should a lawyer do when a juror confronts this lawyer in a parking lot and tells him that she cannot start her car?
- A civil court judge correctly rejects a so-called Wagman based peer hearsay challenge
- CPLR 3404 and the untimely motion to restore that was (in effect) deemed timely
- An affidavit is not be admissible at trial – You knew this already
- Best Evidence Rule Under Fire: New York Courts Adapt to Modern Litigation
- CPLR § 2309(c): Out-of-State Affidavits & Certificate Requirements in NY Courts
- Understanding Peer Review Standards in New York No-Fault Insurance Cases
- Stricken v. dismissed
- Medical Evidence Rules in NY Personal Injury Cases: The Wagman Problem
- Written opposition – the key to beating people on procedural defects
Frequently asked questions
What types of evidence are important in no-fault and personal injury cases?
The evidence that decides most injury cases is documentary: medical records and bills, the police accident report, diagnostic imaging, photographs of the scene and the injuries, and employment records for a lost-earnings claim. CPLR 3101(a) requires full disclosure of all matter material and necessary to the prosecution or defense of an action, so each side can obtain these records before trial. Records of a business are admissible under CPLR 4518(a) when made in the regular course of business at or near the time of the event. Expert opinion on causation and permanence is exchanged under CPLR 3101(d)(1)(i).
What is the business records exception to hearsay in New York?
Under CPLR 4518(a), a record of any act, transaction, occurrence or event is admissible to prove that event if the judge finds it was made in the regular course of a business, that it was the regular course of that business to make it, and that it was made at the time of the event or within a reasonable time after. The rule adds that the maker's lack of personal knowledge goes to weight, not admissibility. Records produced under a subpoena may be authenticated by the custodian's certification under CPLR 3122-a. In no-fault cases, denial forms, mailing logs and peer review reports are usually offered this way.
What role does diagnostic imaging play as evidence in injury cases?
Diagnostic imaging supplies objective evidence of an injury, and objective proof is what the serious injury threshold requires. In Toure v Avis Rent A Car Systems, 98 NY2d 345 (2002), the Court of Appeals held that subjective complaints alone are not sufficient, and that a numeric measurement of lost range of motion, or a qualitative assessment with an objective basis, can substantiate a claim. An MRI or CT report is read with the examining physician's findings; on its own it does not show that the accident caused the condition. CPLR 4532-a admits the image itself when the identifying information is on it and the notice rules are met.
How do New York courts handle surveillance evidence in personal injury cases?
Surveillance must be disclosed before trial. CPLR 3101(i) requires full disclosure of any films, photographs, video tapes or audio tapes involving a party, including transcripts or memoranda of them, and of all portions of that material, including out-takes, not only the portions a party intends to use. Insurers do retain investigators to film plaintiffs, and a video that contradicts sworn testimony about physical limits can be used to impeach the witness. Whether undisclosed or edited footage is excluded is decided by the trial judge on the facts. Expect to be filmed, and describe your limitations accurately at every examination and deposition.