Triable Issues and Conflicting Medical Opinions Bar Entry of Summary Judgment
Following plaintiff’s independent medical examination, defendants moved to dismiss in this motor vehicle accident case on the ground that the injuries plaintiff allegedly suffered failed to meet the “serious injury” threshold requirements of Insurance Law §5102(d). Plaintiff opposed the motion by submitting copies of her medical records and the sworn medical report of her doctor. Finding that the defendants had established their prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by submitting proof that plaintiff’s spine, shoulder and knee injuries were resolved and that plaintiff had full range of motion, the burden shifted to plaintiff. Judge Mayer concluded that plaintiff did meet her burden by raising triable issues of fact as to her range of motion limitations and that the injuries to plaintiff’s spine and knee were significant, permanent, and related to the accident. As such, Judge Mayer denied defendants’ motion for summary judgment holding that the conflicting medical evidence was a question for the jury to resolve at trial. Ordonez v Labor, 2018 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 279, 2018 NY Slip Op 30151(U) (Sup. Ct. S. Co. 2018). Litigants may wish to bear in mind that obtaining non-economic damages differs from obtaining economic damages.
The Law Office of Aaron M. Schlossberg, Esq., P.L.L.C.
(This writing is for general information purposes only, should not be construed as legal advice and does not establish an attorney-client relationship)