« New York Court of Appeals Will Hear Oral Arguments on Automatic Renewal of Services Provision for Contract for Service Under General Obligations Law §§ 5-902 and 5-903 | Main | Serious Injury Part II – New York Court of Appeals Hears Oral Arguments on Findings of Limitations of Range of Motion Contemporaneous With the Subject Motor-Vehicle Accident »

June 13, 2011


Michigan Auto Accident Attorneys

Very interesting post about the range of motion. The doctor himself considers the test unreliable but yet it is still required?

New York Plaintiff Attorney

From a NY Attorney: The judges in the Appellate Divisions have unconstitutionally rewritten the law through judicial legislation. That is the problem. There is NO requirement in the statute to show ROM testing. Patients who focus on treatment get penalized later as plaintiff when it turns out their doctor did not do that one test in the initial stages of treatment. The Judges want the patients to focus on being plaintiff, but at the same time the insurance defense bar accuses them of being litigious.


The plaintiff argues in its motion for leave to appeal the punishment as a demonstration of an applicant's first section focuses on treatment and not the judicial process.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Google Search NYCL