New York City

Published on: October 21, 2012

Spinal injuries can cause problems that increase over the years

by Stephen Bilkis

Spinal injuries can cause problems that increase over the years from the date of injury. An injury that may not seem too severe at the time of injury can actually become much worse as the years go by. An injured spine is more likely to show signs of degenerative disc disease than one that has not been damaged. When a spinal injury occurs at work, it is especially important to document that injury and have it treated immediately to reduce the effects that the personal injury of the spine will have on ones later years. If a person delays too long in filing an application to receive disability benefits on the basis of a spinal injury, they may be denied. The reason for the inability to file a late claim on a spinal injury can be related to the inability to show a direct correlation to the original injury.

When a spine is injured, arthritis and other degeneration of the bone and cartilage of the spine may concentrate in the area of a prior injury. However, it is not possible to determine if the additional degeneration of the spine is associated with normal aging, or has been made worse by the previous injury. One case of this nature was when a Nassau County Police Officer filed a petition on May 5, 1972 with the New York State Policemen’s and Firemen’s Retirement System.

He claimed that six years previous to the application, he had been injured while attempting to carry an injured man on a stretcher from an apartment building. He claimed that his back struck an elevator door where he was compressed between the door and the stretcher. He stated that he sustained an injury to his spine that included a possible injury to the discs. Six years later, he filed his request for total disability associated with the injury from the accident. He claimed that the result of the accident was that he was not able to perform the duties related to being a patrolman on the police force.

Published on: October 9, 2012

There are several different laws in New York which govern the litigation practices

by Stephen Bilkis

There are several different laws in New York City which govern the litigation practices involved in personal injury lawsuits. In order for a person to proceed with an action to sue in reference to a serious bodily injury that was the result of a traffic accident, they must prove that the injury is serious in accordance with the law. The statute CPLR § 3212 and Article 51 of the New York State insurance law specify the guidelines that are used to determine if an injury is considered serious.

There are several different categories that are used to determine serious injury under these statutes. Some of these involve brain injury, loss of an appendage, loss of use of an appendage, loss of a fetus, some brain injuries, and some spinal injury. In order for an injury to be considered serious, it must be pervasive enough to interfere with the person’s ability to function normally on a daily basis. This type of injury is usually one that is permanent in nature. Although, some brain injuries and spinal injuries may not be lifelong disability type injuries.

On June 10, 2007, a woman was driving her 2005 Nissan on East Shore Drive, Massapequa, New York in Nassau County. She was hit in the back end of her vehicle by a 1994 BMW. She received injuries in the accident that she felt met the criteria to be considered serious under the statutes of New York. She filed a personal injury lawsuit based on these injuries. The injuries that she claims to have suffered involved annular tear at L4-5 vertebrae, disc herniations at L3-4, L4-5, and L5-S1. She claims to have been diagnosed with a disc bulge at L2-3 which caused a constriction on the spinal cord. She also sustained an internal derangement of the lumbar spine with a severe strain or sprain of the lumbar spine. She gave a sworn statement to the court that after the accident, she had to stay in bed for a full two weeks. She also claims that after she was able to get out of her bed, she had to stay at home for another four weeks recovering. She stated that at the time of the accident, she was unemployed. However, she claimed that she can no longer take part in many of the activities that she enjoyed such as playing volleyball, gardening, cooking, or driving somewhere that is more than thirty minutes away. She stated that she cannot lift heavy objects or wash dishes. She stated that she joined a local gym and that she uses the recumbent bicycle several times a week to try to stay in shape. In her statement, she did not detail the specific compensable serious injury categories that she contends that her injuries fall under.

Published on: October 4, 2012

On August 8, 2008, a New York woman was a passenger in a vehicle

by Stephen Bilkis

On August 8, 2008, a Brooklyn woman was a passenger in a vehicle that was involved in a traffic accident. The accident occurred in the intersection of Middle Neck Road and Northern Boulevard. This intersection is located in Nassau County in New York State. At the time of the accident, the woman was a passenger in a 2007 Lexus that was being driven by her male companion. The vehicle was struck in the rear end by another vehicle. The woman contends that she sustained a serious injury as defined by the Insurance Laws of New York State in the course of the traffic accident. She subsequently filed a personal injury lawsuit to recover monetary damages as a result of the injuries that she sustained in the accident. The woman contends that her right knee was injured in the accident and that she was required to have arthroscopic surgery on the knee. She also stated that she received a sprain of her neck and lower back. She contends that these injuries prevented her from conducting her usual activities for at least 90 of the 180 days immediately following the accident. She also contends that the knee injury qualifies as a serious injury under the law because she now has limited flexion of the knee that is not within the normal range.

In order for a person to recover monetary damages as the result of an accident under New York Law, they must be able to demonstrate that they obtained an injury of sufficient severity that they were unable to perform their normal day to day activities for at least 90 days of the 180 days that immediately followed the accident. They can also demonstrate that the injury is a permanent disability as defined by them having a limited use of an appendage of the body. Other qualifying injuries fall under spinal injury or brain injury, either one of which may qualify a person to have received a serious injury as defined by the Insurance Laws of the state.

However, these injuries must be quantitative. That means that a medical professional doctor, or chiropractor, must swear under oath to the condition that the woman sustained. She must present these sworn statements to the court. The woman must also show that the doctor performed quantitative non-subjective tests of the body part that she maintains was injured. These tests must demonstrate an actual decrease of use that can be measured as compared to the normal measurements of an uninjured person.

Published on: September 30, 2012

The question about what constitutes a severe injury

by Stephen Bilkis

The question about what constitutes a severe injury under the Insurance Laws of New York is one that is battled in court on a daily basis. The Insurance Laws of New York detail the guidelines that define a serious injury. Not every injury will qualify as serious under the statutes. In order for an injury to qualify as serious, the person must have lost a limb or the use of that limb. If the person is claiming that they lost partial use of the limb, they will have to provide objective evidence that shows exactly how much of a difference there is between what that person can do and what an uninjured person that person’s age is capable of doing with that limb. There must be an objective measurement of the difference. That measurement must be provided by a medical test that is performed by a medical doctor or chiropractor. If the test is subjective, it relies on the personal opinion of the doctor to interpret it. It will not be sufficient to keep the case from being dismissed. In fact, it can be so difficult to prove a serious injury, that it is routine for a defendant of a personal injury lawsuit to file a motion that the injury sustained by the complainant is not severe and requesting the dismissal of the case.

Anytime that a person is going to court for a personal injury, it is an emotional time. Most people who have sustained a serious injury have seen their lives completely altered overnight from the accident. They know that they were injured severely, and more often than not are offended by the suggestion that their injury is not severe. A court of law in Westchester is no place for sentiment. One of the advantages to having an attorney handle your case for you is that they are not offended by the suggestions or claims of the opposing side. It is critical to prove the injury objectively. Just saying that you are injured or even having a doctor say that you are injured is not sufficient to prove your case in a court of law.

The doctor that is seen will have to perform medical tests that clearly show the extent of the injury. That means that an MRI or CT Scan will not be sufficient on its own. In the case of spinal injuries, there are nerve conductivity tests that must be performed. These tests demonstrate the nerve damage that causes the pain. They are objective and there are numerical figures that are assigned to the amount of damage that is present. The doctor is then able to testify in court about a numerical figure provided by a test that was conducted without personal opinion input. Even then, the doctor’s testimony must be sworn or the report certified in order for the test results to be admissible.

Published on: September 7, 2012

This involves a case where the court ruled that plaintiff failed to demonstrate a prima

by Stephen Bilkis

This involves a case where the court ruled that the Westchester plaintiff failed to demonstrate a prima facie case that he suffered serious spinal injury within the meaning of Insurance Law Section 5102 (d).

Plaintiff, age 24, alleged that on August 21, 2006, at approximately 11:20 a.m., a motor vehicle owned and operated by him came into contact with a vehicle owned by defendant owner and operated by defendant driver. The car accident occurred on Old Country Road, at its intersection with Frost Street, County of Nassau. Defendants moved for an order dismissing plaintiffs complaint pursuant to CPLR §3212, on grounds that plaintiff failed to sustain a “serious injury” within the meaning of Insurance Law §5102(d).

Insurance Law §5102(d) provides that a “serious injury means a personal injury which results in (1) death; (2) dismemberment; (3) significant disfigurement; (4) a fracture; (5) loss of a fetus; (6) permanent loss of use of a body organ, member, function or system; (7) permanent consequential limitation of use of a body organ or member; (8) significant limitation of use of a body function or system; or (9) a medically determined injury or impairment of a non-permanent nature which prevents the injured person from performing substantially all of the material acts which constitute such person’s usual and customary daily activities for not less than ninety days during the one hundred eighty days immediately following the occurrence of the injury or impairment” (numbered by the Court). The Court’s consideration in this action is confined to whether plaintiffs injuries constitute a permanent consequential limitation of use of a body organ or member (7) or significant limitation of use of a body function or system.

Published on: September 3, 2012

The action for damages stems from personal injuries

by Stephen Bilkis

The action for damages stems from personal injuries allegedly sustained by the plaintiff as a result of an automobile accident occurred at westbound Jericho Turnpike approximately fifty (50) feet east of Wellington Road, in the County of Nassau, Town of North Hempstead, New York. The accident involved two vehicles, a 2004 Honda operated by plaintiff and a 2004 Jeep owned and operated by defendant.

A Nassau Injury Lawyer said that, at the time of the accident, plaintiff’s vehicle was traveling westbound on Jericho Turnpike. Defendant’s vehicle was also traveling westbound on Jericho Turnpike. Plaintiff contends that her vehicle was stopped in traffic in the left lane on Jericho Turnpike when the defendant’s vehicle struck her from behind, pushing her car forward approximately one car length. Plaintiff further contends that, as a result of the heavy impact, her body was caused to move forward and backward in her vehicle and said impact caused her neck and back to strike the headrest and seat. As a result of the collision, plaintiff claims that she sustained the following injuries:

Posterior disc bulges at C3-C4, C-4-C-5 and C6-C7 impinging on the anterior aspect of the spinal canal; Small joint effusion of the left knee; Menisci and ligament/ right knee; Posterior disc herniations at the L5-S1 impinging on the anterior aspect of the spinal canal and abutting the nerve roots bilaterally; Decreased range of motion of the cervical and lumbar spine; Decreased range of motion of the left knee; Left knee pain/sprain; Cervicalgia; Lumbar disc herniation at L5-S1; Pain in the limbs; Neuropathy; Cervical sprainand strain; Lumbar sprain and strain; Lumbargo; Weakness in muscles.

Published on: August 29, 2012

When a person is injured in a vehicle accident in New York

by Stephen Bilkis

When a person is injured in a vehicle accident in New York, they are limited by the language of the laws that apply to personal injury as far as filing for a compensable lawsuit. There are boundaries that must be adhered to as far as claims of injury are concerned. The injury must be severe as defined by the statutes and it must be permanent as defined by the statute. In order for a person to be able to prove that the injury that they have incurred is both severe and permanent, they are required to have medical proof that can be presented in a court of law.

This can be in the form of a doctor’s testimony, but that doctor must be able to provide specifics on the medical tests that were performed to back up his contention that the injury is both severe and permanent. If the doctor only provides an opinion, then the court may or may not be impressed to agree with him. However, if the doctor provides specific tests that demonstrate that the person has restricted or lost use of a member of their body, then they have probably met the criteria for the injury to be considered severe and permanent. That is not always the case.

On August 8, 2008, a woman was in the intersection of Middle Neck Road and Northern Boulevard. This intersection is located in Nassau County, New York. She was a passenger in a 2007 Lexus that was struck from behind by another vehicle. At the time of the injury, the woman got out of the car and proceeded to walk around the accident scene unaided. She even drove away from the accident scene. However, later, she went to a local hospital to receive treatment because she stated that she began to have pain in her right knee. When her right knee was examined by an orthopedist, he diagnosed her as having a meniscus tear of her right knee. The orthopedic doctor also stated that she had several other soft tissue injuries to her knee. She also claimed that she was getting headaches since the accident. She was examined by the doctor to determine if there was a spinal injury that would account for the symptoms. The doctor determined that she had suffered from a lumbar strain that restricted the range of motion to the cervical and lumbar spines.

Published on: August 20, 2012

A police officer was finishing his shift in 1953

by Stephen Bilkis

A NYC police officer was finishing his shift in 1953. He opened the passenger door of the police car he was driving when he got to the precinct and was removing his shotgun from the car when it suddenly fired. It wounded him and he needed an operation to remove the bullet which had lodged in his abdomen.

He eventually recovered after treatment. He received compensation from the Workmen’s Compensation Board for his loss of earnings during the time of his confinement, treatment and recovery from the gunshot wound. The case was closed in 1957 when the physicians who treated him declared that there was no more disability flowing from the gunshot accident.

Nine years later, in 1962, as he was riding in his police car, he figured in a motor vehicle accident. He sustained injury to his neck and spine. The police officer was paid his salary for the several weeks of his confinement, treatment and recovery from the automobile accident. The police officer sued the owner and driver of the motor vehicle that had caused his spinal injury and the case was settled by them and compensation was duly paid for his spinal injury.

Published on: June 3, 2012

The 1978 case of a white-haired man arrived at the Circuit Court one morning.

by Stephen Bilkis

The 1978 case of a white-haired man arrived at the Circuit Court one morning. The man entered the courtroom to testify in his $1 million lawsuit he filed against Edward H. White II Memorial Hospital.

He filed the lawsuit because he fell out of bed while admitted in the facility. The 50-year-old man claimed that the hospital staff was negligent when they left the railing down on his hospital bed. When he fell, he suffered a spinal injury.

The hospital refuted those claims and said that the patient had raised such a ruckus about having it up that they lowered it – against hospital policy – in order to hopefully prevent another coronary episode in the gentleman.

Published on: April 16, 2012

Fish May Lead to Spine Cures

by Stephen Bilkis

There is no way to repair the spine after catastrophic damage – at least not yet. Scientists have told sources that there may be a cure from an unlikely source: fish.

According to research, fish have the amazing ability to regenerate their spinal cords, not only able to heal spinal injury, but to have full restoration of function. In time, they can be as good as new.

Two scientists have been closely studying this ability and have related some of their findings to doctors. They are working hard to learn how fish regenerate their spinal cords, so they can replicate the same in humans. “To cure spinal cord injury would be amazing and incredible for people who are suffering,” said one biologist.