Paragraph catalog
Sample paragraphs for situations the three annotated samples do not cover, grouped by the part of the complaint where they usually appear. Paragraphs already shown in a sample are not repeated here. Each has the same blanks format and a general note on when a paragraph of that kind is typically used. The wording assumes one plaintiff and one defendant; with more parties, the wording changes to plural, as the multi-vehicle sample shows. No paragraph here is right for every case, and the list is not complete.
Plaintiffs
Plaintiff [plaintiff's full name] is an infant under the age of eighteen years, and this action is brought on the infant's behalf by Plaintiff [parent's or guardian's full name], as the infant's [parent and natural guardian, or guardian].
Used when a plaintiff is under 18. A child sues through a parent or guardian, who is named in the caption with the child (CPLR 1201). A child's claim must be brought by a lawyer (CPLR 321(a)), and any settlement needs court approval (CPLR 1207, 1208). The time limit for a child's own claim may be extended until the child turns 18 (CPLR 208), but a parent's own claims are not extended.
At all times relevant herein, Plaintiff [plaintiff's full name] was a passenger in a motor vehicle involved in the occurrence described herein.
Used when the injured plaintiff was a passenger rather than a driver. A passenger can usually sue the driver of either vehicle, or both, since the passenger generally did not cause the accident. The catalog's passenger paragraphs describe fault in more detail.
Defendants and vehicle owners
At all times hereinafter mentioned, Defendant [vehicle owner's full name] was and still is a resident of the State of [state where the owner lives].
States where a separate vehicle owner lives, which bears on venue (CPLR 503) and on service. Used together with the separate-owner paragraphs below.
Defendant [vehicle owner's full name] is alleged to have been the owner, registrant, or other person or entity with an ownership interest in a vehicle bearing [state that issued the defendant's plate] State license plate number [defendant's license plate number] involved in the occurrence.
Used when the other vehicle's owner is a different person or company from its driver. Owners are commonly named as defendants because of Vehicle and Traffic Law § 388 Evidence, which generally makes owners responsible for permitted drivers' negligence.
At all times hereinafter mentioned, Defendant [vehicle owner's full name] was the owner of the motor vehicle bearing [state that issued the defendant's plate] State license plate number [defendant's license plate number] operated by Defendant [driver's full name] and involved in the occurrence alleged herein.
Alleges that one defendant owned the vehicle another defendant was driving. Ownership is usually confirmed through registration records, the police accident report, or insurance information.
At all times hereinafter mentioned, Defendant [vehicle owner's full name] maintained, controlled, repaired, and used, or caused and permitted to be maintained, controlled, repaired, and used, the motor vehicle bearing [state that issued the defendant's plate] State license plate number [defendant's license plate number] operated by Defendant [driver's full name], and said vehicle was being operated with the knowledge, consent, and permission of Defendant [vehicle owner's full name], express or implied.
Alleges that the driver was using the owner's vehicle with the owner's permission, which is the basis for owner liability under Vehicle and Traffic Law § 388 Evidence. Permission is generally presumed from ownership, but an owner can try to disprove it.
At all times hereinafter mentioned, Defendant [leasing company's name] was the lessor of the motor vehicle bearing [state that issued the defendant's plate] State license plate number [defendant's license plate number] involved in the occurrence alleged herein.
Used when the vehicle was leased. A federal law known as the Graves Amendment (49 U.S.C. § 30106 Evidence) generally protects companies in the business of renting or leasing vehicles from owner liability for the driver's negligence, unless the company itself was negligent or committed a crime. Naming a leasing company therefore raises questions that often call for a lawyer's review.
At all times hereinafter mentioned, Defendant [lessee's full name] was the lessee of the motor vehicle bearing [state that issued the defendant's plate] State license plate number [defendant's license plate number] involved in the occurrence alleged herein.
Identifies the person or company that leased the vehicle. A lessee who drives the vehicle, or lets others drive it, may be responsible much like an owner.
At all times hereinafter mentioned, Defendant [leasing company's name], as lessor, owned, leased, maintained, controlled, repaired, and/or reserved the right to control the motor vehicle bearing [state that issued the defendant's plate] State license plate number [defendant's license plate number], and said vehicle was being used and operated by Defendant [lessee's full name] and/or with the knowledge, consent, and permission of Defendant [leasing company's name], express or implied.
Alleges the leasing company's ownership and the lessee's permitted use. See the Graves Amendment note above, which often limits claims against commercial lessors.
Defendant [defendant's full name] is alleged to have owned, operated, maintained, controlled, employed, or otherwise been responsible for a vehicle bearing [state that issued the defendant's plate] State license plate number [defendant's license plate number] or transportation service involved in the occurrence.
Used for taxis, livery cars, and other vehicles for hire. Commercial vehicles often involve several possible defendants, such as the driver, the vehicle owner, a base or company, and special insurance rules.
City vehicles and public entities
Defendant [name of the city agency or public entity] is alleged to be a public corporation or other public entity whose conduct, acts, omissions, ownership, operation, maintenance, supervision, or control is alleged to have contributed to the occurrence.
Used when a defendant is New York City, a city agency, a public transit authority, or another public body. Special rules apply: a notice of claim generally must be served within 90 days of the accident (General Municipal Law § 50-e Evidence), the public entity may demand an oral examination before suit (§ 50-h), and the lawsuit generally must start within one year and 90 days (§ 50-i Evidence). Some authorities have their own statutes and deadlines.
A Notice of Claim was served upon [name of the city agency or public entity] on [date the notice of claim was served], concerning the occurrence alleged herein.
States that the required notice of claim was served. Suits against public entities generally must allege this. If the 90-day deadline has passed, a court may allow a late notice only in limited circumstances and only on application (General Municipal Law § 50-e(5) Evidence).
Rear-end and chain-reaction collisions
Plaintiff alleges that, immediately before the occurrence, Plaintiff's vehicle bearing [state that issued the plaintiff's plate] State license plate number [plaintiff's license plate number] was proceeding in the roadway and that Defendant's vehicle bearing [state that issued the defendant's plate] State license plate number [defendant's license plate number] came into contact with the rear of Plaintiff's vehicle. To the extent Defendant contends that Plaintiff made a sudden or abrupt stop, Plaintiff alleges that such contention does not excuse Defendant's obligation to operate the vehicle with due care, maintain a reasonably safe distance and rate of speed, and avoid the collision under the circumstances then existing. Plaintiff further alleges that the circumstances surrounding the speed, stopping, following distance, traffic conditions, and manner of operation of the vehicles are matters requiring proof and determination based upon the evidence.
Addresses a common defense: that the front car stopped suddenly. New York courts have often held that a sudden stop, by itself, does not excuse the rear driver, who must keep a safe distance (Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1129(a) Evidence), though the circumstances matter.
Plaintiff alleges that Plaintiff's vehicle bearing [state that issued the plaintiff's plate] State license plate number [plaintiff's license plate number] was positioned at or toward the rear of the group of vehicles involved in the occurrence and was struck from behind during the sequence of impacts. Plaintiff further alleges that the acts and omissions of the Defendant or Defendants, including the manner in which the vehicles were operated, followed, stopped, slowed, controlled, and/or maintained, contributed to the occurrence and to the injuries and damages alleged herein. The precise sequence, positions, movements, and points of impact of the vehicles are matters to be determined from the evidence.
Used in a multi-vehicle collision when the plaintiff's vehicle was at or near the back of the line and was struck from behind. The multi-vehicle sample shows the general chain-reaction paragraph for a plaintiff at the front.
Plaintiff alleges that Plaintiff's vehicle bearing [state that issued the plaintiff's plate] State license plate number [plaintiff's license plate number] occupied an intermediate position among the vehicles involved in the occurrence and that the vehicles came into contact during a sequence of impacts. Plaintiff further alleges that the acts and omissions of the Defendant or Defendants, including the manner in which the vehicles were operated, followed, stopped, slowed, controlled, and/or maintained, contributed to the occurrence and to the injuries and damages alleged herein. The respective positions, movements, points of impact, sequence of impacts, and causal contributions of the vehicles involved are matters to be determined from the evidence.
Used in a multi-vehicle collision when the plaintiff's vehicle was in the middle, which may mean it was struck from behind and also pushed into the vehicle ahead. The driver of the vehicle ahead may then be a possible defendant or may bring claims of his or her own.
Intersections and traffic controls
The occurrence took place at or near [intersection], and Defendant [defendant's full name] failed to operate the vehicle bearing [state that issued the defendant's plate] State license plate number [defendant's license plate number] with reasonable care and in accordance with the traffic conditions and controls then existing.
A general paragraph for collisions at intersections. It is often combined with a paragraph about the specific traffic control, such as a stop sign or signal.
A stop sign controlled Defendant [defendant's full name]'s direction of travel at or near [intersection], and Defendant failed to exercise reasonable care in approaching and proceeding through the controlled intersection.
Used when a stop sign controlled the defendant's direction. A driver facing a stop sign must stop and then yield to vehicles already in or approaching the intersection (Vehicle and Traffic Law §§ 1142, 1172).
Defendant [defendant's full name] failed to stop as required by the traffic control governing Defendant's approach and proceeded into the intersection, thereby contributing to the occurrence.
Used when the defendant allegedly failed to stop at all. Failing to obey a traffic control device may be evidence of negligence.
At the time of the occurrence, Defendant [defendant's full name] proceeded through a traffic-control signal at or near [intersection] in a manner that contributed to the collision.
Used when the defendant allegedly entered on a red light (Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1111). Signal timing is often disputed, so witness statements and video are commonly important.
Opposite-direction collisions
The vehicles collided in a head-on or substantially opposing-direction impact, and Defendant [defendant's full name] is alleged to have failed to operate the motor vehicle bearing [state that issued the defendant's plate] State license plate number [defendant's license plate number] with reasonable care and within the portion of the roadway appropriate to Defendant's direction of travel.
Used for head-on or opposite-direction crashes. Drivers generally must keep to the right half of the roadway (Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1120).
Defendant [defendant's full name] operated the vehicle bearing [state that issued the defendant's plate] State license plate number [defendant's license plate number] in a direction or lane inconsistent with the lawful flow of traffic, thereby contributing to the occurrence.
Used when the defendant was allegedly driving the wrong way on a one-way street or in the wrong lane.
Pedestrians
Plaintiff's location and movements at the time of the occurrence, including whether Plaintiff was within a crosswalk or other designated crossing area, are relevant to the respective conduct of the parties and shall be determined from the facts and evidence.
Used instead of the pedestrian sample's crosswalk paragraph when the pedestrian was crossing elsewhere. A pedestrian crossing outside a crosswalk generally must yield to vehicles (Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1152 Evidence), but drivers still must use due care (§ 1146 Evidence), and fault may be shared (CPLR 1411 Evidence).
The circumstances concerning Plaintiff's entry into the roadway, the visibility of Plaintiff, the speed and position of Defendant's vehicle bearing [state that issued the defendant's plate] State license plate number [defendant's license plate number], and the time available to perceive and respond to the occurrence are relevant to the respective conduct of the parties.
Addresses a common defense that the pedestrian stepped out suddenly. It leaves the timing and visibility questions to be decided on the evidence.
The occurrence occurred under lighting and visibility conditions existing at the time and place alleged, and Defendant [defendant's full name] is alleged to have failed to exercise reasonable care in operating the vehicle bearing [state that issued the defendant's plate] State license plate number [defendant's license plate number] under those conditions.
Used when darkness, weather, or lighting was a factor. Drivers must adjust to the conditions, including by using headlights and reducing speed.
Bicycles, e-bikes, and scooters
On or about [date of the accident], at or near [street address or intersection where the accident happened], an occurrence took place involving Plaintiff and [description of the bicycle, e-bike, or scooter] and/or a motor vehicle bearing [state that issued the defendant's plate] State license plate number [defendant's license plate number].
The accident-description paragraph for a bicycle, e-bike, or e-scooter, used in place of the vehicle or pedestrian versions in the samples. Whether the no-fault rules apply to a rider can depend on the type of device and on whether a motor vehicle was involved.
Defendant [defendant's full name] operated the vehicle bearing [state that issued the defendant's plate] State license plate number [defendant's license plate number] in or across a bicycle facility or bicycle lane at or near [location of the bicycle lane] in a manner that contributed to the occurrence.
Used when a vehicle entered or crossed a bike lane. Drivers must use due care toward cyclists (Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1146 Evidence), and New York City has additional traffic rules for bike lanes.
At the time of the occurrence, Plaintiff was using or riding [description of the bicycle, e-bike, or scooter], and Defendant [defendant's full name] failed to exercise reasonable care under the circumstances.
Used when the plaintiff was riding an e-bike or e-scooter. The rules for these devices differ by type and speed class, which can affect both fault and insurance coverage.
Passengers
Plaintiff [plaintiff's full name] was a passenger in the vehicle bearing [state that issued the defendant's plate] State license plate number [defendant's license plate number] operated by Defendant [defendant's full name], and the occurrence was caused, in whole or in part, by Defendant's negligent operation, control, maintenance, or use of the vehicle.
Used when a passenger was hurt in a crash involving only the vehicle he or she was riding in, and the claim is against its driver or owner.
Plaintiff [plaintiff's full name] was a passenger in a motor vehicle involved in a collision with one or more other vehicles, and the occurrence was caused, in whole or in part, by the acts or omissions of one or more defendants.
Used when a passenger was hurt in a collision between two or more vehicles. Passengers commonly name the drivers and owners of all vehicles involved, since fault between them may be disputed.
Intentional conduct
The circumstances alleged include intentional or potentially intentional operation of a motor vehicle bearing [state that issued the defendant's plate] State license plate number [defendant's license plate number], and Plaintiff alleges that Defendant [defendant's full name]'s conduct contributed to the occurrence and resulting injuries.
Used when the vehicle may have been used deliberately. Intentional claims such as assault and battery generally must be brought within one year (CPLR 215(3)), much sooner than negligence claims, and insurance policies often exclude intentional acts.
Plaintiff alleges that Defendant [defendant's full name] intentionally used or operated the vehicle bearing [state that issued the defendant's plate] State license plate number [defendant's license plate number] in a manner that subjected Plaintiff to a risk of physical contact and injury.
Alleges that the defendant intentionally used the vehicle to threaten or strike the plaintiff. See the one-year time limit noted above (CPLR 215(3)).
To the extent supported by the facts and applicable law, Plaintiff alleges that Defendant [defendant's full name] failed to exercise reasonable care in retaining, supervising, controlling, or protecting against conduct presenting a foreseeable risk of harm.
Alleges that an employer or other party failed to control someone it knew or should have known was dangerous. These claims are fact-specific and are typically brought against a company rather than an individual driver.
Following the motor vehicle bearing [state that issued the defendant's plate] State license plate number [defendant's license plate number] occurrence, a physical altercation or other intentional conduct allegedly occurred involving Defendant [defendant's full name], which Plaintiff alleges caused or contributed to Plaintiff's injuries.
Used when a fight or other intentional act happened after the crash. The one-year time limit for intentional claims (CPLR 215(3)) may apply to that part of the case.
Impairment and alcohol
Plaintiff alleges that Defendant [defendant's full name] operated the vehicle bearing [state that issued the defendant's plate] State license plate number [defendant's license plate number] while impaired or otherwise affected by a substance or condition to an extent that contributed to the occurrence.
Used when the driver may have been impaired by alcohol or drugs (Vehicle and Traffic Law Article 31). A related criminal case or conviction may be relevant evidence. Allegations of impairment should rest on facts, such as an arrest or police observations.
Plaintiff alleges that Defendant [name of the bar, restaurant, or store] may have provided or furnished alcoholic beverages under circumstances giving rise to a potential claim under applicable law.
New York's Dram Shop Act (General Obligations Law § 11-101) can allow a claim against a business that unlawfully sold alcohol to a visibly intoxicated person who then caused injury. These claims have specific requirements.
Injuries and losses
The injuries alleged include injuries affecting [parts of the body injured], together with such related conditions and sequelae as may be established through the medical records and evidence.
Lists the injured parts of the body. More detail is usually provided later in a bill of particulars. Injuries should match the medical records.
Following the occurrence, Plaintiff obtained medical evaluation, treatment, and/or diagnostic services for injuries allegedly resulting from the occurrence.
States that the plaintiff received medical care. The treatment history is typically documented through records requested later in the case.
Plaintiff incurred medical, hospital, diagnostic, rehabilitation, pharmaceutical, and/or other healthcare-related expenses as a result of the injuries alleged herein, in an amount to be established by the evidence.
Claims medical expenses. No-fault insurance pays basic medical costs, so a lawsuit generally seeks only expenses above what no-fault covers (Insurance Law §§ 5102(a) Evidence, 5104(a) Evidence).
Plaintiff sustained loss of earnings and/or income as a result of the injuries alleged herein, in an amount to be established by the evidence.
Claims lost earnings. No-fault insurance covers part of lost earnings up to set limits; the lawsuit generally seeks the loss above those limits (Insurance Law § 5102(a) Evidence).
Plaintiff alleges that the injuries sustained may result in future medical expenses, limitations, impairment, loss of earnings, or other future damages, to the extent established by competent evidence.
Claims future medical costs, limitations, or lost earnings. Future losses usually require medical or expert proof.
At the time of the occurrence, Plaintiff was employed by [employer's name] and alleges that the injuries affected Plaintiff's ability to work and/or earn income to the extent established by the evidence.
Identifies the plaintiff's employer, as background for a lost-earnings claim.
Plaintiff has sustained other damages consisting of [description of the other losses], to the extent recoverable and established by the evidence.
A place to describe other losses not covered elsewhere.
By reason of the foregoing, Plaintiff is entitled to the sum of [dollar amount], together with interest, costs, and disbursements.
States a dollar amount. A complaint for personal injuries must not state an amount (CPLR 3017(c)), so a paragraph like this is used only where no personal-injury claim is made, such as a property-damage-only case.
Family members' claims
AS AND FOR A [FIRST, SECOND, and so on] CAUSE OF ACTION
ON BEHALF OF PLAINTIFF [PLAINTIFF'S FULL NAME]
(Loss of Services)
Plaintiff [plaintiff's full name] repeats, reiterates, and realleges each and every allegation set forth above with the same force and effect as if fully set forth herein.
The heading for a family member's separate claim, usually a spouse's claim for loss of services and companionship (sometimes called loss of consortium). It depends on the injured person's claim: if that claim fails, this one generally does too.
As a result of the injuries sustained by Plaintiff [injured plaintiff's full name], Plaintiff [plaintiff's full name] has been deprived of the services, society, companionship, and consortium of Plaintiff [injured plaintiff's full name], and has sustained damages thereby, to the extent recoverable under applicable law and established by the evidence.
By reason of the foregoing, Plaintiff [plaintiff's full name] has been damaged in an amount to be determined at trial.
A spouse's claim for the loss of the injured spouse's services, society, and companionship. New York generally allows this claim for married spouses, not for unmarried partners.
As a result of the injuries sustained by infant Plaintiff [injured plaintiff's full name], Plaintiff [plaintiff's full name], as a parent of the infant, has been deprived of the infant's services, and has incurred and will continue to incur expenses for the infant's medical care and treatment, to the extent recoverable under applicable law and established by the evidence.
By reason of the foregoing, Plaintiff [plaintiff's full name] has been damaged in an amount to be determined at trial.
A parent's claim for the loss of an injured child's services and for the child's medical expenses. This is the parent's own claim, so the child's age does not extend its time limit.
Insurance and evidence
Plaintiff has pursued and/or is pursuing available first-party benefits arising from the occurrence, including no-fault benefits where applicable.
States that no-fault benefits have been sought. A no-fault application generally must be made in writing within 30 days of the accident, to the insurer of the vehicle involved.
A police or incident report was prepared concerning the occurrence, and the contents, admissibility, and evidentiary effect of that report are reserved for determination under applicable law.
Notes that a police report exists. Parts of a police report may or may not be admissible as evidence, depending on who made each statement.
Plaintiff alleges that photographic, video, or other visual evidence relating to the occurrence and/or the condition of the vehicles, roadway, scene, or injuries may exist and may be relevant to the claims and defenses in this action, including evidence concerning the motor vehicle bearing [state that issued the defendant's plate] State license plate number [defendant's license plate number]. Plaintiff reserves the right to rely upon and introduce such evidence as may be obtained and authenticated through discovery and otherwise in accordance with applicable law.
Notes that photos or video may exist. Video from businesses, buses, and traffic cameras is often recorded over quickly, so it is commonly requested early.
One or more persons may possess information concerning the occurrence, the surrounding circumstances, or Plaintiff's injuries and damages.
Notes that witnesses may have information. Witness names typically come from the police report or from people at the scene.
Last reviewed October 2026. Sample text is general and may be out of date.