Massachusetts gives him 3 years to file suit; Connecticut would usually give him only 2. That extra year is real, but it is not forever. In Massachusetts, most injury cases have a 3-year statute of limitations under G.L. c. 260, § 2A, usually starting on the crash date.

And no, an old MRI does not kill the case.

Massachusetts follows the eggshell plaintiff rule in plain-English form: if a driver injured someone who was already vulnerable, they are still on the hook for the harm they caused, including an aggravation of a prior condition. Insurers know this. They still wave around old scans because it works on scared people.

What they are really saying is: "He was already hurt, so we should pay less or nothing." That is not the law. The real fight is over how much worse the crash made him.

If this was a winter wreck in Cambridge - black ice on Memorial Drive, a pileup near Alewife Brook Parkway, reduced visibility during a nor'easter shutdown - the insurer will try to blame weather, age, degeneration, and every medical record they can get. Old back findings, neck bulges, prior pain complaints: all fair game for them. But if he was functioning before and has been worse since, that matters.

Two Massachusetts rules matter fast:

• To recover pain and suffering from an auto claim, you usually need over $2,000 in reasonable medical bills or a qualifying serious injury under the state's no-fault law.
• If a city vehicle or other public employer was involved, a presentment claim can be due within 2 years, even though the lawsuit deadline is still generally 3 years.

Get the Cambridge Police crash report, pre-crash and post-crash treatment records, and proof of what changed: work limits, missed shifts, new symptoms, stronger meds, new injections, worse MRI findings, or surgery recommendations. The insurer is betting the old MRI scares you into dropping a case that may still be alive.