The 2009 SuperLawyers Listings have been released and once again Faraci Lange attorneys are right at the top. Five Faraci Lange attorneys (Angelo G. Faraci, Paul K. Lange, Joseph A. Regan, Stephen G. Schwarz and Brian M. Zorn) were selected in the category of Plaintiff Medical Malpractice, representing all but one of the six lawyers from Rochester selected in this category. The same five attorneys from Faraci Lange were the only attorneys from Rochester selected in the Plaintiff Product Liability category. Four Faraci Lange attorneys (Faraci, Lange, Regan and Zorn) were selected in the Personal Injury – General category and Schwarz was also listed in the Environmental Litigation category.

Two Faraci Lange attorneys (Faraci and Schwarz) were in the Top Fifty Upstate New York SuperLawyers listing for the second consecutive year. This listing is comprised of the highest rated 50 attorneys in Upstate New York which includes all specialties.

Faraci Lange is proud of the attorneys selected by their peers for this distinction.

I. Introduction

In an effort to combat rising automobile insurance rates, in 1974 the New York Legislature passed sweeping changes to the Insurance Law designed to provide a basic level of economic coverage for New York drivers hurt in motor vehicle accidents while at the same time significantly curtailing the number of motor vehicle cases litigated in the State courts.

Known as the No-Fault law, the statutes create a dual system for compensating persons involved in motor vehicle accidents. Regardless of fault, every automobile insurance policy in New York provides for the payment of first-party benefits of up to $50,000 for “basic economic loss” for covered persons injured in car accidents, but bars the filing of lawsuits against the at-fault party to recover non-economic loss (i.e. pain and suffering) except for those who have suffered “serious injury” as defined by the statute. More…

Statutes of Limitations are legally binding rules that establish time periods within which a lawsuit or claim must be filed. They are generally bright lines that once passed will forever bar even a clearly meritorious lawsuit. That said, there are certainly valid policy reasons for the imposition of time periods for the initiation of legal proceedings. The statute of limitations embodies the principles that the value of evidence diminishes over time and that parties to a dispute need closure, so fairness dictates that the person bringing the lawsuit act with speed and efficiency to preserve these principles.

Of course, fairness is a two way street: the time periods are generally crafted to give the party bringing the lawsuit sufficient time to learn they have been harmed. Indeed, in many States, the time periods do not begin to run until a person knows or reasonably should know that they have been injured. It is in this regard that the New York statute of limitations in medical malpractice cases is so unfair. More…