physical injury requirement (New York) · Go Syfert
← New York issues

physical injury requirement in New York

5 New York opinions name it 3 courts 1990–2026 1 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by New York courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (6)

CaseFollowedCited
Spencer v. Golden Eagle, Inc.green
nyappdiv · 2011 · cited in 1 New York opinions naming this issue, 2026–2026
1 sentence

2026To meet their prima facie burden on a motion for summary judgment dismissing a serious physical injury claim, defendants must show with competent evidence that plaintiff's injuries are not serious as defined by Insurance Law § 5102(d), or not causally related to the accident ( see Spencer v Golden Eagle, Inc. , 82 AD3d 589, 590 [1st Dept 2011]).

11
Toure v. Avis Rent a Car Systems, Inc.green
ny · 2002 · cited in 1 New York opinions naming this issue, 2026–2026
2 sentences

2026Serious injury as pertains to both "permanent consequential limitation" and "significant limitation" require that defendants establish: (1) there is no objective medical evidence of injuries or abnormalities; (2) there are no medical findings of resulting limitations by either quantified ROM testing, or a qualitative assessment of limitations compared with normal function ( Toure v Avis Rent a Car Sys. , 98 NY2d 345, 350-351, 353 [2002]); or (3) lack of causation, e.g., a gap in treatment, an intervening medical problem, or a pre-existing condition ( see Pommells , 4 NY3d at 572 [2005]; Toure

2026Serious injury as pertains to both "permanent consequential limitation" and "significant limitation" require that defendants establish: (1) there is no objective medical evidence of injuries or abnormalities; (2) there are no medical findings of resulting limitations by either quantified ROM testing, or a qualitative assessment of limitations compared with normal function ( Toure v Avis Rent a Car Sys. , 98 NY2d 345, 350-351, 353 [2002]); or (3) lack of causation, e.g., a gap in treatment, an intervening medical problem, or a pre-existing condition ( see Pommells , 4 NY3d at 572 [2005]; Toure

11
Pommells v. Perezgreen
ny · 2005 · cited in 1 New York opinions naming this issue, 2026–2026
1 sentence

2026Serious injury as pertains to both "permanent consequential limitation" and "significant limitation" require that defendants establish: (1) there is no objective medical evidence of injuries or abnormalities; (2) there are no medical findings of resulting limitations by either quantified ROM testing, or a qualitative assessment of limitations compared with normal function ( Toure v Avis Rent a Car Sys. , 98 NY2d 345, 350-351, 353 [2002]); or (3) lack of causation, e.g., a gap in treatment, an intervening medical problem, or a pre-existing condition ( see Pommells , 4 NY3d at 572 [2005]; Toure

11
Redland Soccer Club, Inc. v. Department of the Armygreen
pa · 1997 · cited in 1 New York opinions naming this issue, 2013–2013
1 sentence

2013Corp., 206 W Va 133, 140-142, 522 SE2d 424, 431-433 [1999] [holding that a plaintiff who does not allege a present physical injury may recover future medical monitoring costs]; Redland Soccer Club, Inc. v Department of the Army & Dept. of Defense of the U.S., 548 Pa 178, 195-196, 696 A2d 137, 145-146 [1997] [stating that the injury in a medical monitoring claim is an economic one]; Burns v Jaquays Min.

11
Bower v. Westinghouse Electric Corp.green
wva · 1999 · cited in 1 New York opinions naming this issue, 2013–2013
1 sentence

2013Corp., 206 W Va 133, 140-142, 522 SE2d 424, 431-433 [1999] [holding that a plaintiff who does not allege a present physical injury may recover future medical monitoring costs]; Redland Soccer Club, Inc. v Department of the Army & Dept. of Defense of the U.S., 548 Pa 178, 195-196, 696 A2d 137, 145-146 [1997] [stating that the injury in a medical monitoring claim is an economic one]; Burns v Jaquays Min.

11
Tedeschi v. Smith Barney, Harris Upham & Co., Inc.green
nysd · 1982 · cited in 1 New York opinions naming this issue, 1992–1992
1 sentence

1992In Groat v Town Bd. ( 100 Misc 2d 326 [Sup Ct, Schenectady County 1979]), a spouse’s derivative claim for lost services, society and companionship was dismissed in that there appeared to be "no authority for permitting same where the harm complained of did not result in physical injury to the spouse or physical confinement away from the spouse.” ( 100 Misc 2d, at 330 ; accord, Tedeschi v Smith Barney, Harris Upham & Co., 548 F Supp 1172 [SD NY 1982].) In the absence of a physical injury claim, the spouse claiming loss of consortium is merely alleging that the other spouse did not continue to p

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New York. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (5)

CaseCitedYears
People v. Hope green
nyappdiv · 1987
2 sentences

1994Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the physical injury requirement of attempted robbery in the second degree was sufficiently established by the complainant’s testimony and photographs of her injuries (see, Penal Law § 10.00 [9]; People v Messier, 191 AD2d 819 ; People v Pike, 173 AD2d 649 ; People v Adams, 163 AD2d 318 ; People v Hope, 128 AD2d 638 ).

1990The complainant testified regarding the nature of his injuries and the fact that he experienced pain for approximately two weeks after the incident, thereby satisfying the physical injury requirement of robbery in the second degree (see, e.g., People v Hope, 128 AD2d 638 ).

21990–1994
People v. Adams green
nyappdiv · 1990
1 sentence

1994Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the physical injury requirement of attempted robbery in the second degree was sufficiently established by the complainant’s testimony and photographs of her injuries (see, Penal Law § 10.00 [9]; People v Messier, 191 AD2d 819 ; People v Pike, 173 AD2d 649 ; People v Adams, 163 AD2d 318 ; People v Hope, 128 AD2d 638 ).

11994–1994
People v. Pike green
nyappdiv · 1991
1 sentence

1994Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the physical injury requirement of attempted robbery in the second degree was sufficiently established by the complainant’s testimony and photographs of her injuries (see, Penal Law § 10.00 [9]; People v Messier, 191 AD2d 819 ; People v Pike, 173 AD2d 649 ; People v Adams, 163 AD2d 318 ; People v Hope, 128 AD2d 638 ).

11994–1994
People v. Messier green
nyappdiv · 1993
1 sentence

1994Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the physical injury requirement of attempted robbery in the second degree was sufficiently established by the complainant’s testimony and photographs of her injuries (see, Penal Law § 10.00 [9]; People v Messier, 191 AD2d 819 ; People v Pike, 173 AD2d 649 ; People v Adams, 163 AD2d 318 ; People v Hope, 128 AD2d 638 ).

11994–1994
Groat v. Town Board green
nysupct · 1979
2 sentences

1992In Groat v Town Bd. ( 100 Misc 2d 326 [Sup Ct, Schenectady County 1979]), a spouse’s derivative claim for lost services, society and companionship was dismissed in that there appeared to be "no authority for permitting same where the harm complained of did not result in physical injury to the spouse or physical confinement away from the spouse.” ( 100 Misc 2d, at 330 ; accord, Tedeschi v Smith Barney, Harris Upham & Co., 548 F Supp 1172 [SD NY 1982].) In the absence of a physical injury claim, the spouse claiming loss of consortium is merely alleging that the other spouse did not continue to p

1992In Groat v Town Bd. ( 100 Misc 2d 326 [Sup Ct, Schenectady County 1979]), a spouse’s derivative claim for lost services, society and companionship was dismissed in that there appeared to be "no authority for permitting same where the harm complained of did not result in physical injury to the spouse or physical confinement away from the spouse.” ( 100 Misc 2d, at 330 ; accord, Tedeschi v Smith Barney, Harris Upham & Co., 548 F Supp 1172 [SD NY 1982].) In the absence of a physical injury claim, the spouse claiming loss of consortium is merely alleging that the other spouse did not continue to p

11992–1992

Where else courts name it

IL 11 (1990–2024) TN 8 (1996–2014) IN 7 (1989–2023) CA 6 (1989–1998) HI 6 (1981–2008) MD 6 (1998–2025) KY 6 (1996–2026) NY 5 (1990–2026) CT 5 (2002–2025) TX 5 (1984–1993) IA 4 (1983–2026) KS 4 (1998–2015) OR 4 (2000–2022) MO 3 (1983–2015) VA 3 (1987–1998) DC 3 (1990–2002) PA 2 (2002–2015) MT 2 (1984–1995) NJ 2 (1988–1988) FL 2 (1985–2007) AK 2 (1995–2018) WI 2 (1982–1991) MA 2 (2002–2005) NE 2 (1993–2003)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check