New York, N.Y. (August 5, 2025) - A recent New York appellate opinion focused on an all-too-common occurrence in the defense of injury actions: an entry in a hospital or medical record containing a statement from the plaintiff concerning the accident that contradicts the version the plaintiff has presented in litigation. Although encountering such an entry often feels like locating the proverbial silver bullet, it is largely worthless if it is not admissible. The problem is that such entries tend to constitute hearsay.

Attorneys typically invoke the business records exception to the hearsay rule to admit such an entry into evidence, although the entry may also qualify as a party admission in appropriate circumstances (see Fraser v 147 Rockaway Pkw, LLC, 203 AD3d 894, 896 [2d Dept 2022]). New York’s Court of Appeals has long held that an entry that contains “a narration of the accident” is only admissible under the business records exception if it is “germane to diagnosis or treatment” (Williams v Alexander, 309 NY 283, 287 [1955]). However, judges and attorneys alike have long struggled with applying this standard in the context of particular cases.

Fortunately, the Appellate Division, Second Department recently issued a helpful opinion on this topic. In Pillco v 160 Dikeman St., LLC (__ AD3d __, 2025 NY Slip Op 04495 [2d Dept July 30, 2025]), Justice Francesca E. Connolly clarified the standards courts should apply when considering whether to admit an accident-related entry in a hospital or medical record into evidence. Following the guidance offered in her opinion should make it easier for practitioners to admit such entries into evidence.