Leica Supply, Inc. v Encompass Indem. Co., 2012 NY Slip Op 50890(U)(App. Term 2nd Dept. 2012)
Plaintiff’s argument that its assignor’s failure to appear for the duly scheduled EUOs permitted only the denial of pending claims is without merit (see ARCO Med. NY, P.C. v Lancer Ins. Co., 34 Misc 3d 134[A], 2011 NY Slip Op 52382[U] [App Term, 2d, 11th & 13th Jud Dists 2011]). Moreover, plaintiff does not claim to have responded to the EUO requests; therefore, plaintiff’s objection on appeal regarding those requests will not be heard
The next issue to be tackled: What happens when Plaintiff responds to the EUO demands and still fails to attend the EUO? Do we finally reach a reasonableness analysis? I would say I can hardly wait, but it is the lack of certainty that makes reading these decisions interesting. As each gap gets filled, this sometimes becomes an exercise in who can cite the most principles of law.