Legal Opinion · Dissent

Giles v. Gi Yi

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided April 26, 2013Published

1DissentWhalen, J.

I respectfully dissent because the majority’s holding imposes unduly burdensome obligations not contemplated by 22 NYCRR 202.17 upon individuals seeking recovery for personal injuries. Contrary to the view of the majority, 22 NYCRR 202.17 does not require a personal injury plaintiff to retain an expert to address the issue of causation and provide the expert’s report to the defendant prior to the defense medical examination of plaintiff.

Pursuant to CPLR 3121, defendants in personal injury actions may require a plaintiff to submit to a medical examination (see CPLR 3121 [a]). The procedures…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Nero v. KendrickAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API