Governor Hochul Proposes Changes to New York’s “Serious Injury” Threshold

New York's motor vehicle "serious injury" threshold is a heavily debated legal issue in 2026. Governor Kathy Hochul has proposed significant changes to New York's auto insurance and tort system, which if effectuated, could completely change the landscape of motor vehicle accident personal injury litigation in New York.

Understanding the "Serious Injury" Threshold

Under New York's current Insurance Law, plaintiffs injured in motor vehicle accidents generally can recover damages for pain and suffering if they satisfy the "serious injury" threshold set forth in Insurance Law § 5102(d). The statute currently defines "serious injury" through several categories, including death, fracture, significant disfigurement, permanent loss or limitation of use, and the commonly litigated "90/180-day" category. The "90/180" category allows recovery where a medically determined injury prevents the plaintiff from performing substantially all customary daily activities for at least 90 of the first 180 days following the accident. Part of Governor Hochul's reform package is to completely remove or drastically narrow the 90/180-day category of the "serious injury" threshold.

Shift from Contributory to Comparative Fault

In addition to seeking to bar a path to recovery for accident victims under the serious injury threshold, Governor Hochul's proposed reforms look to limit who can recover damages for an accident by changing from a contributory negligence analysis to a comparative fault rule. The current pure contributory negligence system allows the plaintiff to recover any percentage of the defendant's negligence which contributed to the injuries (even if it is merely 1%), to the comparative negligence system which only allows the plaintiff to recover if the defendant is found to be at least 50% at fault. In other words, if the plaintiff is found to be more than 50% at fault, the plaintiff is totally barred from recovering anything.

While Governor Hochul contends that the reforms are necessary to mitigate fraud, lower insurance premiums, and reduce abusive litigation, plaintiffs' attorneys, consumer advocates, the New York State Trial Lawyers Association ("NYSTLA"), and even critics such as clergy members in New York, argue that many of the proposed reforms would only benefit large insurance companies at the expense of legitimate victims of motor vehicle accidents that will no longer be able to obtain justice for the tort committed against them. Further, critics of the Governor's bill argue that the reforms hold guarantee or requirement that insurance premiums will actually be reduced, and see the Governor's plan as only a way to further enrich insurance companies at the expense of accident victims.