A case was heard in the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department,  regarding a case of  CRPS/RSDS. The decision was handed down on June 1, 2010.

The judges noted that,

“In a progress note dated June 12, 2007, plaintiff’s treating podiatrist, Dr. Doolan, assessed plaintiff with chronic regional pain syndrome, RSD, i.e., reflex sympathetic dystrophy.  …clearly apprised that she had sustained, inter alia, a proximal intra-articular fracture of the right first toe requiring surgery. … further advised that plaintiff had restricted range of motion of the right toe and right foot, and swelling and derangement of the right great toe.

The (original court) properly concluded that RSD was not a “new” injury, but a sequela of plaintiff’s original injury.”

In the case of  SPIEGEL v. GINGRICH, the trial court “granted the motion to strike the supplemental bill of particulars because it was served 12 days before trial was scheduled to commence. This alleged delay resulted in the adjournment of the trial without date.”

The court reversed the trial court’s ruling which struck the supplemental bill of particulars:

“Defendant herein cannot seriously contend that he was prejudiced. He argued, before the motion court, that evidence of RSD was in the record as early as June 2007, citing Dr. Doolan’s assessment. Further, the adjournment of the trial without a date furnished ample opportunity for defendant to conduct discovery concerning plaintiff’s allegation that she suffers from RSD.”

Full, unedited decision on Leagle.