« 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.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)