In Ciocca v. Park, the Court of Appeals affirms the Appellate Division, Third Department’s Majority holding concerning concerning causation of injuries regarding an automobile accident.  The issue at trial was whether the accident caused the plaintiff’s injuries or, as the defendant argued, a degenerative condition did so.  In support of his position, the plaintiff offered his own testimony and the testimony of his orthopedic surgeon.  The surgeon’s testimony was based on the plaintiff’s subjective statements, X-rays, and an MRI, and he testified that it was impossible to tell from the X-rays whether the automobile accident caused the plaintiff’s injuries.  The trial court granted the defendant a directed verdict, which was affirmed at both levels of appeal.

Although the case is not unusual, I find that it offers a good lesson on evidentiary techniques at trial.  The trial court excluded the orthopedic surgeon’s testimony about the MRI because he relied on the radiologist’s report as the foundation for his testimony and the plaintiff’s attorney did not call the radiologist as a witness.

Also, the Court’s decision took an unusually short amount of time from the Third Department’s August 11, 2005 decision — even for an appeal taken solely on submissions.