Two recent cases involving the question of whether a certain injury is serious enough to overcome the limited tort threshold were both decided in the plaintiff’s favor.

In Cadena v. Latch, decided on October 4, 2013, the court reserved summary judgment where the plaintiff’s treating physician identified eight distinct injuries related to the accident and the plaintiff testified that pain from these injuries impacted their daily life.  The court held that, under these circumstances, reasonable minds could differ on the issue of severity of the plaintiff’s injuries and, therefore, the issue should be decided by a jury.

Similarly, in Peterman v. Sakalauskas, decided on October 10, 2013, the court denied summary judgment in a limited tort case where the plaintiff sustained permanent disc bulges and neck and back sprains, which affected the plaintiff’s ability to find gainful employment.  The court held that there was a genuine issue of fact as to whether the injuries were serious enough to get over the limited tort threshold and, therefore, the issue should be decided by a jury.