Extended Search
Generic filters
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Search in excerpt
Search in comments
Filter by Custom Post Type
Extended Search
Generic filters
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Search in excerpt
Search in comments
Filter by Custom Post Type

Lorthe v. Adeyeye – Case Brief Summary (New York)

In Lorthe v. Adeyeye, 306 A.D.2d 252, 760 N.Y.S.2d 530 (2d Dep't. 2003), the defendants submitted the affirmed medical reports of their medical experts which established, prima facie, that neither plaintiff sustained a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102(d) as a result of the subject motor vehicle accident.

In opposition to the motion, the plaintiffs submitted the affirmations of their examining orthopedist, who stated that each plaintiff was suffering restrictions of motion in his or her lumbosacral spine.

However, the plaintiffs' orthopedist failed to address the proof that the disc bulges in the lumbosacral spines of both plaintiffs were due to pre-existing degenerative changes.

Therefore, his findings that the plaintiffs current restrictions of motion were causally related to the subject accident was mere speculation.