Anthony Pommells, Appellant v. Francisco R. Perez, Respondents; David G. Brown, Appellant, v. Athena D…

Summary

In a consolidated decision of three soft-tissue 'serious injury' cases under the No-Fault Law, the Court of Appeals held that proof of a herniated disc—even with objective medical evidence—is not alone sufficient to establish a serious injury under Insurance Law § 5102 (d), and that summary dismissal may be appropriate where contributory factors such as a gap in treatment, an intervening medical problem, or a preexisting condition interrupt the chain of causation between the accident and the claimed injury. Applying that framework, the court affirmed the dismissals in Pommells (unexplained cessation of all treatment plus an unaddressed kidney condition) and Carrasco (unrebuted persuasive evidence of preexisting degenerative disease), but reversed in Brown, where the treating physician's sworn explanation that further therapy would be merely palliative and defendants' merely conclusory degeneration notation raised triable issues of fact. The court also confirmed that sworn medical opinions relying on unsworn MRI reports are competent evidence.