 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Pinales v. CSC Holdings9/30/2002
his wife had died was (*12)deemed "inconsistent, insufficient and implausible" given plaintiff's claim of "intense pain" during the period in which no treatment was sought and the fact that plaintiff "found the time to go to work."] Absent such substantiation, the reason proffered by the plaintiff for discontinuing treatment remains conclusory and non-probative.
The court further finds the affirmation and report of Dr. Goldman to be insufficient to raise a question of fact concerning permanency or significant limitation, despite the doctor's opinion that the motor vehicle accident of April 12, 2000 is a "competent cause of JUAN PINALES's cervical herniated and bulging discs and cervical radiculopathy," and that this accident "is a competent cause of JUAN PINALES' ongoing neck and radiating shoulder pain" and restriction of ranges of motion. In terms of the functional significance of these injuries and pain, Dr. Goldman stated that plaintiff's "neck pain will severely limit the amount that he can turn his head and neck, his ability to lift and will limit most physical activities," obviously parroting, almost word for word, plaintiff's subjective complaints. Grossman v. Wright, supra. Further, the doctor does not address the gap in plaintiff's treatment or offer a medical explanation for it. Marshall v. Albano, supra. Finally, the doctor does not address the findings in the MRI report which are suggestive of a pre-existing condition (e.g., central canal stenosis and foraminal narrowing) nor does he mention the report of plaintiff's physician, Dr. Ross, which states that plaintiff's cervical spine x-rays demonstrated osteoarthritis and degenerative disc disease. See Watt v. Eastern Investigative Bureau, Inc. 273 AD2d 226.
(*13) In sum, applying the "objective medical evidence" test of scientific reliability to the plaintiff's proof, this court concludes that plaintiff has not submitted sufficient evidence of "serious injury " to defeat defendant's motion
Accordingly, the defendant's motion is, in all respects, granted This constitutes the order of the court.
Page 1 2 3 4 5 New York Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|