Spinal Injury Lawyer Blog 24/7

Published on: October 26, 2012

In this case, the driver of the other car filed a motion for summary judgment

by Stephen Bilkis

On July 23, 2007, a man was sitting at the traffic control light located at Greenwich Street and Jerusalem Avenue in Nassau County, New York when another vehicle hit his. The other vehicle made contact with his vehicle in a same direction side swipe manner. As the vehicle was driving past his in the same direction, it swerved and the offending vehicle swept up the passenger side of the man’s car from the rear passenger side area to the front. The man filed a personal injury and 90/180 case against the driver of the other vehicle.

In order for a person to claim a serious person injury under the auspices of the New York Insurance Law, they must be able to prove that they suffered an injury that was invasive enough to alter their normal everyday lifestyle. In order to make that statement, the injured person must be able to demonstrate through medical records that they have sustained either a permanent loss of use, or partial percentage loss of use of a member of their body.

Alternatively, they can show a brain injury or spinal injury that is severe enough to have altered their lives and receives treatment. They may also file a 90/180 claim that contends that although they recovered from their injuries, they were incapacitated by them for 90 out of the 180 days that immediately followed the accident. It is important that the injured person is able to demonstrate that they have been continually under the care of a doctor from the time of the accident until the time that they filed their suit. The court has been known to dismiss a gap in treatment for legitimate reasons if it can be properly documented.

Published on: October 23, 2012

When a person decides that they want to file a personal injury lawsuit in New York

by Stephen Bilkis

When a person decides that they want to file a personal injury lawsuit in New York, they are required to submit proof to the courts that their injury is a severe injury as defined by the requirements of Insurance Law § 5102. That means that they must also show that they meet the requirements of Insurance Law § 5104 as it regards non-economic loss. When the elements of the injury are not in compliance with these codes, then the person will not be allowed to file the suit. A lawsuit in New York, alleging a personal injury may not be filed if the injury is merely an inconvenience. In order for an injury to be determined severe it must render that person unable to work for a substantial amount of time and/or prevent that person from continuing to work in their chosen career field.

The injuries that are defined as serious injuries are spelled out in the law. They are defined as injuries that deprive a person of the use of a limb, or actually results in the amputation of a limb. Some spinal injuries and brain injuries may also qualify as severe. In order for the spine injuryor brain injury to be categorized as serious, it must be so pervasive of an injury as to render the person unable to function on a daily basis as they were accustomed to performing. The ability to continue participating in daily activities that they were able to participate in prior to the injury would mean that the injury will not be considered a severe injury under the law.

In October of 2009, a woman was involved in a traffic accident at the intersection of Bellmore Avenue and Sunrise Highway. The accident occurred in Nassau County in the State of New York. At the time of the accident, the police determined that the vehicle that hit hers was at fault in the accident. At the accident scene, the woman left her car, walked around the scene, and was able to drive her vehicle to work after the accident. She later went home and stayed out of work for one day. She started to see a chiropractor following the accident because she claimed that she was having headaches and pain from personal injury that she incurred as a result of the accident. She was x-rayed by the chiropractor and went to see him two to three times a week for several months into the winter of 2010.

Published on: October 21, 2012

Spinal injuries can cause problems that increase over the years

by Stephen Bilkis

Spinal injuries can cause problems that increase over the years from the date of injury. An injury that may not seem too severe at the time of injury can actually become much worse as the years go by. An injured spine is more likely to show signs of degenerative disc disease than one that has not been damaged. When a spinal injury occurs at work, it is especially important to document that injury and have it treated immediately to reduce the effects that the personal injury of the spine will have on ones later years. If a person delays too long in filing an application to receive disability benefits on the basis of a spinal injury, they may be denied. The reason for the inability to file a late claim on a spinal injury can be related to the inability to show a direct correlation to the original injury.

When a spine is injured, arthritis and other degeneration of the bone and cartilage of the spine may concentrate in the area of a prior injury. However, it is not possible to determine if the additional degeneration of the spine is associated with normal aging, or has been made worse by the previous injury. One case of this nature was when a Nassau County Police Officer filed a petition on May 5, 1972 with the New York State Policemen’s and Firemen’s Retirement System.

He claimed that six years previous to the application, he had been injured while attempting to carry an injured man on a stretcher from an apartment building. He claimed that his back struck an elevator door where he was compressed between the door and the stretcher. He stated that he sustained an injury to his spine that included a possible injury to the discs. Six years later, he filed his request for total disability associated with the injury from the accident. He claimed that the result of the accident was that he was not able to perform the duties related to being a patrolman on the police force.

Published on: October 18, 2012

On August 1, 2005, a manual laborer was working on a construction site

by Stephen Bilkis

On August 1, 2005, a Manhattan manual laborer was working on a construction site that was being operated on a military base. The objective of the construction was to renovate some military housing buildings that were run down. In order to renovate the buildings, the construction crew had to first remove all of the kitchen and bathroom appliances that were inside each of the units in the multi-unit buildings. The construction crew had a dumpster located outside of the buildings on the street that was available for them to put the debris from the renovation into. The Long Island construction team had been working in one of the buildings for several days and the manual laborer was tasked with the job of transporting the debris from inside the building out to the dumpster on the curb.

On that morning, the crew had filled one of the dumpsters and needed an additional empty one moved from farther down the street up to where the work was being done. The site supervisor instructed the laborer to get the dumpster and move it up. The dumpster was about to be moved when another construction contractor pulled a truck up in front of it. The site supervisor instructed the manual laborer to tell the driver of the truck to move the truck so that they could get to the dumpster. The laborer followed the instructions that he was given and then stepped backward away from the truck so that he could signal to the truck driver where to park. As he walked backward, he stepped on the top of a manhole cover. The cover was not properly in place and tilted up causing the man to fall into the manhole. He sustained several severe injuries as a result of this workplace accident. He contends that he suffered from severe spinal injuryas well as leg impairment.

He had to have several surgical procedures on his spine over the following year including bone grafts and fusions of his spine. He filed a personal injury lawsuit against both companies and the property owner because he contends that they were negligent in allowing the manhole cover to not be securely in place. In this case, there was no argument that the man sustained serious injury as defined by the Insurance Laws of New York. The problem for the court in this case was determining who was responsible for the spinal injury that the man had suffered that left him disabled and unable to work.

Published on: October 15, 2012

When a person is hit by a car, the injuries that they incur are likely to be serious

by Stephen Bilkis

When a person is hit by a car, the spinal injuries that they incur are likely to be serious in nature. However, pursuant to New York State Insurance Law § 5102, in order for an injury to be considered serious, it must be so pervasive that it required that person to restrict their lifestyle for 90 of the first 180 days following the injury. That means that the burden to show that they have incurred a serious bodily injury falls to the complainant. The only way to demonstrate a serious bodily injury is to have a board certified doctor perform tests that show definite results. These results must demonstrate that the person has incurred an injury that is both severe and invasive enough to limit the use of a limb. Alternately, in the case of brain or spine injuries, the complainant must be able to show that the injury has rendered them unable to perform tasks that they considered day to day activities prior to the accident.

This became the goal of a man who worked in New York State as a security guard for a school. One day while he was directing traffic for parents who were dropping off and picking up their children, he observed a woman driving a car in the bus lane. When she pulled in, a bus had pulled behind her preventing her from backing up. The Bronx security guard approached her vehicle to help guide her out of the driveway. As he approached, she suddenly put the car in forward gear and struck him. He contends that the force of the impact propelled him up onto the hood of her car and that he sustained serious bodily injury as a result of the accident. This accident occurred on March 12, 2012 at around nine in the morning.

As it turned out, the woman who was driving the car, had borrowed it from her long term boyfriend. The Manhattan boyfriend had rented the car from ELRAC. ELRAC is in the business of leasing automobiles. During the course of the investigation into this case, the security guard determined that the boyfriend had a restricted license at the time that he had rented the car from ELRAC. He contends that if ELRAC had not rented the car to a person that had demonstrated that they were likely to operate the vehicle in a manner that would cause harm to another, that he would not have been injured by the car. He contends that ELRAC had a responsibility to ensure that the persons who rented cars from them would operate those vehicles in a safe manner. The fact that the man’s license was restricted should have been an indicator to them that the man was a less safe driver.

Published on: October 13, 2012

Determining whether an injury is considered serious

by Stephen Bilkis

Determining whether an injury is considered serious under the Insurance Law § 5102, is an issue that is common in the courts of New York State. In order for an injury to be considered serious by law in New York, it must be so serious that for the first 90 days out of the 180 days immediately following the accident, the person must be prohibited from maintaining his normal daily activities. A board certified physician who has conducted tests that demonstrate a diminished capacity in one or more limbs, the spine, or the brain must also document the injury. A person who has sustained a spinal injury, must be able to show through documented tests performed by a board certified doctor that they have a limited range of motion that is permanent in order to recover punitive damages. In the case of a traffic accident injury, where the person is a passenger in one of the cars, that person must attach the driver of the car that they were in and their insurance company as well as the driver of the second car and their insurance companies. Ultimately, the insurance companies will each do their best to place the burden of compensation on the other company.

In one case that involved a traffic accident from March 17, 2008, a man was injured in the accident while he was a passenger in one of the cars. The accident occurred at the intersection of Front Street and Main Street which are in the Township of Hempstead. Hempstead is located in Nassau County. In this case, the car that the complainant who was injured was in, was owned by a person other than the driver of the car. Because of that, he had to attach the driver of the car, the owner of the car, and the insurance company. There is little question about the facts of the accident itself. The insured person was wearing his seatbelt at the time of the accident even though the airbags in the car did not deploy. At the time of the accident, none of the people involved in the accident requested an ambulance so none came to the scene of the accident.

The injured complainant did not go to a hospital for treatment until later, after the date of the accident. He ultimately sought treatment by an orthopedist and a neurologist for injuries that he claims he incurred during the accident. His doctors claim that he sustained several neck and back injuries, as well as an injury to his right shoulder that has resulted in permanent partial disability of those limbs. The defendant insurance companies filed a request to have the man examined by a doctor of their choosing. That doctor claimed that the man had no injuries that could be termed serious under the New York State Insurance Law. He maintained that his examination revealed that the man did not have any significant reduction in his range of motion. The defendant insurance companies filed a motion to have the court grant summary judgment dismissing the case as filed because they contend that the case does not meet the qualifications for a serious injury.

Published on: October 9, 2012

There are several different laws in New York which govern the litigation practices

by Stephen Bilkis

There are several different laws in New York City which govern the litigation practices involved in personal injury lawsuits. In order for a person to proceed with an action to sue in reference to a serious bodily injury that was the result of a traffic accident, they must prove that the injury is serious in accordance with the law. The statute CPLR § 3212 and Article 51 of the New York State insurance law specify the guidelines that are used to determine if an injury is considered serious.

There are several different categories that are used to determine serious injury under these statutes. Some of these involve brain injury, loss of an appendage, loss of use of an appendage, loss of a fetus, some brain injuries, and some spinal injury. In order for an injury to be considered serious, it must be pervasive enough to interfere with the person’s ability to function normally on a daily basis. This type of injury is usually one that is permanent in nature. Although, some brain injuries and spinal injuries may not be lifelong disability type injuries.

On June 10, 2007, a woman was driving her 2005 Nissan on East Shore Drive, Massapequa, New York in Nassau County. She was hit in the back end of her vehicle by a 1994 BMW. She received injuries in the accident that she felt met the criteria to be considered serious under the statutes of New York. She filed a personal injury lawsuit based on these injuries. The injuries that she claims to have suffered involved annular tear at L4-5 vertebrae, disc herniations at L3-4, L4-5, and L5-S1. She claims to have been diagnosed with a disc bulge at L2-3 which caused a constriction on the spinal cord. She also sustained an internal derangement of the lumbar spine with a severe strain or sprain of the lumbar spine. She gave a sworn statement to the court that after the accident, she had to stay in bed for a full two weeks. She also claims that after she was able to get out of her bed, she had to stay at home for another four weeks recovering. She stated that at the time of the accident, she was unemployed. However, she claimed that she can no longer take part in many of the activities that she enjoyed such as playing volleyball, gardening, cooking, or driving somewhere that is more than thirty minutes away. She stated that she cannot lift heavy objects or wash dishes. She stated that she joined a local gym and that she uses the recumbent bicycle several times a week to try to stay in shape. In her statement, she did not detail the specific compensable serious injury categories that she contends that her injuries fall under.

Published on: October 7, 2012

On July 9, 2009 around noon, a traffic accident took place at the intersection

by Stephen Bilkis

On July 9, 2009 around noon, a traffic accident took place at the intersection of West Sunrise Highway and North Bayview Avenue in Freeport, New York in the County of Nassau.

Complicating this accident was the fact that it involved three vehicles actively and one vehicle in a more passive aspect. A 2005 Nissan which was involved in the accident was owned and operated by the person who was injured and who filed a personal injury lawsuit as a result of the accident. The injured party contends that a BMW which was owned and operated by the defendant in the personal injury suit did not stop at the traffic signal located at that location. Rather, they went through the red light and struck a U-Haul rental truck that was in the intersection. The U-Haul truck was pushed by the force of the impact into the complainants Nissan. The Nissan was then shoved backward into a fourth vehicle. As a result of the accident, the complainant who was the driver of the Nissan claims that he suffered from a serious bodily injury as defined in the New York State Insurance Law guidelines.

In order for an injury to be categorized as serious under the New York State Insurance Law guidelines, the person who is claiming the injury must be able to prove that they suffered from an injury that caused them to lose the use of a part of their body, a serious spinal injury, or a brain injury that was debilitating. Alternatively, they can show that as a result of the accident, they were unable to perform their usual daily activities or go to work for at least 90 days out of the 180 days that immediately followed the accident. That type of claim is referred to as a 90/180 claim. In order for a claimant to be able to prove that they suffered from a serious injury, they must have corroborating evidence in the form of court certified documentation from a licensed medical professional in the state of New York.

Published on: October 4, 2012

On August 8, 2008, a New York woman was a passenger in a vehicle

by Stephen Bilkis

On August 8, 2008, a Brooklyn woman was a passenger in a vehicle that was involved in a traffic accident. The accident occurred in the intersection of Middle Neck Road and Northern Boulevard. This intersection is located in Nassau County in New York State. At the time of the accident, the woman was a passenger in a 2007 Lexus that was being driven by her male companion. The vehicle was struck in the rear end by another vehicle. The woman contends that she sustained a serious injury as defined by the Insurance Laws of New York State in the course of the traffic accident. She subsequently filed a personal injury lawsuit to recover monetary damages as a result of the injuries that she sustained in the accident. The woman contends that her right knee was injured in the accident and that she was required to have arthroscopic surgery on the knee. She also stated that she received a sprain of her neck and lower back. She contends that these injuries prevented her from conducting her usual activities for at least 90 of the 180 days immediately following the accident. She also contends that the knee injury qualifies as a serious injury under the law because she now has limited flexion of the knee that is not within the normal range.

In order for a person to recover monetary damages as the result of an accident under New York Law, they must be able to demonstrate that they obtained an injury of sufficient severity that they were unable to perform their normal day to day activities for at least 90 days of the 180 days that immediately followed the accident. They can also demonstrate that the injury is a permanent disability as defined by them having a limited use of an appendage of the body. Other qualifying injuries fall under spinal injury or brain injury, either one of which may qualify a person to have received a serious injury as defined by the Insurance Laws of the state.

However, these injuries must be quantitative. That means that a medical professional doctor, or chiropractor, must swear under oath to the condition that the woman sustained. She must present these sworn statements to the court. The woman must also show that the doctor performed quantitative non-subjective tests of the body part that she maintains was injured. These tests must demonstrate an actual decrease of use that can be measured as compared to the normal measurements of an uninjured person.

Published on: October 2, 2012

The above entitled action stems from personal injuries allegedly sustained by plaintiff

by Stephen Bilkis

The above entitled action stems from personal injuries allegedly sustained by plaintiff as a result of an automobile accident with defendant occurred on May 16, 2008, when plaintiffs’ vehicle was exiting Northern State Parkway to Route 110 in Melville, County of Suffolk, State of New York. Plaintiff was operating a 2003 Lincoln Town Car which was owned by his employer Executive Limo. Defendant was the owner and operator of a 2001 Chevrolet. It is alleged that the automobile that was being driven by plaintiff was struck in the rear by the automobile being driven by defendant. Defendant claims that the impact was heavy and caused his glasses to fly off and his body to move back and forth inside the vehicle despite the fact that he was seat belted.

A Suffolk man said that, as a result of the accident plaintiff claims that he sustained the following injuries: Sprain of the anterior cruciate ligament/left knee; Tear in the posterior horn of the medial meniscus of the left knee and may require future surgery; Acromion impingement on the supraspinatous muscle of the left shoulder which may require future surgery; Increased signal in the supraspinatous tendon consistent with tendonopathy/left shoulder; Subligamentous posterior disc herniations at C3-4, C4-5, C5-6 impinging on the anterior aspect of the spinal canal at C3-4 and C4-5 and on the anterior aspect of the spinal cord at C5-6; Subligamentous posterior disc herniations of the lumbosacral spine at L4-5 and L5-S1 impinging on the anterior aspect of the spinal canal, the neural foramina bilaterally and left nerve root at L4-5; Moderate to sever stenosis from L3-L5; Cervical, thoracic and lumbar myofascitis; Lumbar and cervical radiculitis/radiculopathy; Left bicepital tendonitis; Left shoulder derangement; Left knee derangement; Left ankle sprain/strain; Left foot contusion and left plantar fascitis; Cervical sprain/strain; Thoracic sprain/strain; Lumbar sprain/strain; Cervical acceleration/deceleration injury; Myofascitis; Bilateral ulnar motor neuropathy at elbows; Borderline left median motor neuropathy; Right, distal medial sensory neuropathy; Bilateral ulnar sensory neuropathy; Left rotator cuff sprain; Decreased range of motion of the cervical spine; Decreased range of motion of the left shoulder; Myofascitis of the cervical, thoracic and lumbar spine; Left supraspinatus tendinopathy and impingement.

Plaintiff commenced the action with service of a Summons and Verified Complaint. Defendant moves, pursuant to CPLR § 3212 and Article 51 of the Insurance Law of the State of New York, for an order granting her summary judgment on the ground that plaintiff did not sustain a “serious injury” in the subject accident as defined by New York State Insurance Law § 5102(d). Plaintiff opposes defendant’s motion.