New York Appeals Court Revives Car Accident Injury Case, Says Defense Must Also Rule Out Causation

New York's no-fault insurance law limits when someone hurt in a car accident can sue for pain and suffering: unless the injury meets one of several statutory categories known as "serious injury" under Insurance Law § 5102(d), a lawsuit for non-economic damages generally cannot proceed. Defendants in car accident cases frequently move for summary judgment on exactly that ground, arguing that a plaintiff's injuries — however real — simply do not clear that legal bar. A decision issued this month by the Appellate Division, Second Department, is a reminder that clearing that bar is only half of what a defendant has to prove.

In Alam v Uber Technologies, Inc., decided September 16, 2026, the plaintiff, Syedul Alam, sued Uber Technologies and driver Adlet Ilyassov over injuries from a motor vehicle accident, alleging serious injury to his cervical spine, lumbar spine, left shoulder, and left knee. Ilyassov moved for summary judgment, arguing Alam's injuries did not meet the "permanent consequential limitation of use" or "significant limitation of use" categories under the serious injury statute. The Supreme Court, Queens County, agreed and dismissed the case in March 2025.

The Second Department reversed. The panel found that even though the defendant had made an initial showing that the injuries did not meet the statutory threshold, that showing alone was not enough to win the motion, because the defendant also had to establish, as part of that same initial burden, that the injuries were not caused by the accident in the first place. According to the court, the defendant "failed to establish, prima facie, that the alleged injuries...were not caused by the accident" — and because that threshold showing was incomplete, the burden never shifted to Alam to explain any gap in his medical treatment, a common secondary battleground in these cases. With triable issues of fact remaining as to the spine, shoulder, and knee injuries, the appellate court denied summary judgment and returned the case to the trial court.

The ruling underscores a distinction that matters in nearly every serious-injury motion filed in New York: whether an injury is severe enough under the statute, and whether that injury was actually caused by the accident being sued over, are two separate questions, and a defendant generally must address both to win dismissal before trial. It is not uncommon for defense medical experts to focus heavily on the degree of a plaintiff's limitation — range-of-motion measurements, functional restrictions, and the like — while saying comparatively little about whether a pre-existing condition, a subsequent event, or some other cause might explain the injury instead of the accident. Alam is a reminder that a gap on the causation side of that analysis can be just as fatal to a defense motion as a gap on the severity side, even when only one of several claimed body parts is affected.

For the millions of licensed drivers and countless passengers, cyclists, and pedestrians who share New York's roads each year — including the growing number of riders and drivers who rely on rideshare platforms — the practical significance of a case like this is less about any single legal doctrine and more about what it takes to keep an injury claim alive long enough to be heard by a jury. Medical documentation that ties specific injuries to the specific accident at issue, and not just their severity, can be central to withstanding a summary judgment motion, and that kind of documentation is often easiest to gather and preserve close in time to when the injury occurred.

Anyone in New York who has been injured in a motor vehicle accident, including one involving a rideshare vehicle, and who has questions about how the serious injury threshold or a case like Alam might apply to their situation, is welcome to contact Baltazard Law Office, which represents personal injury clients across New York State on a contingency basis, to discuss their situation.

Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

Sources

By Baltazard Law Office

New York Appeals Court Revives Car Accident Injury Case, Says Defense Must Also Rule Out Causation

Have a Question About Your Case?

Ready to discuss your case?