Alexander Cogbill Wins on Summary Judgment and Case is Dismissed under New York’s “Serious Injury” Threshold


Plaintiff alleged tendon and meniscal tears in the left knee and tendon tears in the left ankle as a result of a motor vehicle accident, which prevented her from playing with her grandchildren and impaired her ability to walk. She demanded $5,000,000 in her Bill of Particulars. After discovery, Alexander Cogbill moved for summary judgment relying exclusively upon Plaintiff’s medical records. The Court held that Mr. Cogbill’s client was entitled to summary judgment for a number of reasons: (1) Plaintiff failed to distinguish the impairments she attributed to this accident from an accident with only four months prior with different injuries, but similar impairments; (2) Plaintiff’s doctors’ reports failed to explain that the limitations existed in both the uninjured right knee and allegedly injured left knee, even though the impairment in the left knee was greater; (3) notes of “improvement” by a therapist nullified a finding of serious injury by a doctor, who only saw Plaintiff once in the middle of treatment; and (4) Plaintiff’s explanation for stopping treatment because it was unavailing.