News
Lowering the Bar? (NY)
February 6, 2019
Share to:
The Appellate Division, Second Department, recently took up the issue of whether a plaintiff involved in a motor vehicle accident may recover damages for lost earnings despite failure to prove a serious injury as defined by Insurance Law § 5102(d).
In <em><a href="http://blog.wcmlaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Gore-v.-Cardany.pdf">Gore v. Cardany</a></em> 2018 NY Slip Op 08632 (2d Dep’t 2018), plaintiff was rear-ended by the defendant while stopped at a red light. Plaintiff then commenced an action to recover damages for personal injuries allegedly sustained to his neck, back and left shoulder. At the time of the accident, plaintiff was in the course of his employment as a bus driver, and sought additional damages for past and future lost earnings in light of his inability to work following the accident. Plaintiff was granted summary judgment on the issue of liability and the case proceeded to trial on the issue of damages.
A Westchester County jury found that plaintiff’s injuries did not meet any of the threshold categories under Insurance Law § 5102(d), awarding him nothing at all for pain and suffering. Despite concluding that plaintiff had not sustained a serious injury, however, the jury awarded plaintiff for past lost earnings in the amount of $156,000 and future lost earnings in the amount of $750,000 (over 15 years.) Defendant thereafter moved to set aside this portion of the jury verdict. The trial court agreed, setting aside the verdict as to all damages.
On appeal, the Appellate Division reinstated the award for past lost earnings in the sum of $156,000, finding that plaintiff had established these damages with “reasonable certainty,” and as such, plaintiff had satisfied his burden of proof (<em>see Lodato v. Greyhawk N. Am., LLC</em>, 39 AD3d 494, 495; <em>Harris V City Of New York</em>, 2 AD3d 782, 784). Relying on provisions of the Insurance Law, the Court held that “a plaintiff is not required to prove that he or she sustained a serious injury as defined by Insurance Law §5102(d) in order to recover for economic loss exceeding $50,000 incurred as a result of a motor vehicle accident (<em>see</em> Insurance Law § 5104[a].” (Internal citations omitted). Thus, plaintiff’s own testimony that he had been unable to work because of the injuries sustained in the accident, together with submission of his W-2 forms, was sufficient to meet his burden of proof. By contrast, plaintiff failed to provide any competent medical evidence that he would be unable to perform any work in the future, and therefore failed to prove his damages for future lost earnings with the required reasonable certainty. Nevertheless, plaintiff was permitted to recover $156,000 for lost earnings despite failure to prove that he had sustained a serious injury under the Insurance Law.
Thanks to Tyler Rossworn for his contribution to this post.