Key Takeaway
New York passes no-fault divorce legislation in 2010, allowing divorce based on irretrievable breakdown.
This article is part of our ongoing no-fault coverage, with 271 published articles analyzing no-fault issues across New York State. Attorney Jason Tenenbaum brings 24+ years of hands-on experience to this analysis, drawing from his work on more than 1,000 appeals, over 100,000 no-fault cases, and recovery of over $100 million for clients throughout Nassau County, Suffolk County, Queens, Brooklyn, Manhattan, and the Bronx. For personalized legal advice about how these principles apply to your specific situation, contact our Long Island office at (516) 750-0595 for a free consultation.
I was inspired by DG over at NFP to write something not no-fault related, per se. But then I realized people do not read this blog to find out my thoughts on politics and other societal issues. At least I hope that is not the case. Surprisingly, I do get many hits when I delve into issues that are only tangentially related to PIP issues, which is interesting.
But, since there has been a lot of talk about no-fault regulation and legislation, I thought I would mention the piece of no-fault legislation that passed. That would be “no-fault” divorce. A copy of the bill that passed both chambers and will be signed as a chapter law (A-9753A) – and it is a short one – is reproduced here:
1 Section 1. Section 170 of the domestic relations law is amended by 2 adding a new subdivision 7 to read as follows: 3 (7) The relationship between husband and wife has broken down irre- 4 trievably for a period of at least six months, provided that one party 5 has so stated under oath. No judgment of divorce shall be granted under 6 this subdivision unless and until the economic issues of equitable 7 distribution of marital property, the payment or waiver of spousal 8 support, the payment of child support, the payment of counsel and 9 experts’ fees and expenses as well as the custody and visitation with 10 the infant children of the marriage have been resolved by the parties, 11 or determined by the court and incorporated into the judgment of 12 divorce.
Have a happy, healthy and safe independence day today.
Free Consultation · No Fee Unless We Win
Does this apply to your situation?
Every case is different. Get a free, confidential case review from an experienced attorney who can tell you exactly where you stand.
Related Articles
- The amendments to no-fault regulations and what they mean to you
- Plaintiff no-fault firm legislative influence on State Senator introductions
- No-Fault verification requirements and partial compliance issues
- Understanding CPLR 3212(g) paradigm in no-fault cases
- New York No-Fault Insurance Law
Legal Update (February 2026): Since this post’s publication in 2010, New York’s no-fault divorce law has been refined through court decisions and procedural amendments, particularly regarding the resolution of economic issues and the “irretrievable breakdown” standard. Practitioners should verify current provisions of Domestic Relations Law Section 170(7) and related court rules, as implementation guidance and procedural requirements may have evolved significantly over the past fifteen years.
Legal Context
Why This Matters for Your Case
New York's no-fault insurance system, established under Insurance Law Article 51, is one of the most complex insurance frameworks in the country. Every motorist must carry Personal Injury Protection coverage that pays medical expenses and lost wages regardless of fault, up to $50,000 per person.
But insurers routinely deny valid claims using peer reviews, EUO scheduling tactics, fee schedule reductions, and coverage defenses. The Law Office of Jason Tenenbaum has handled over 100,000 no-fault cases since 2002 — from initial claim submissions through arbitration before the American Arbitration Association, trials in Civil Court and Supreme Court, and appeals to the Appellate Term and Appellate Division. Jason Tenenbaum is one of the few attorneys in the state who both writes his own appellate briefs and tries his own cases.
His 2,353+ published legal articles on no-fault practice are cited by attorneys throughout New York. Whether you are dealing with a medical necessity denial, an EUO no-show defense, a fee schedule dispute, or a coverage question, this article provides the kind of detailed case-law analysis that helps practitioners and claimants understand exactly where the law stands.
About This Topic
New York No-Fault Insurance Law
New York's no-fault insurance system requires every driver to carry Personal Injury Protection (PIP) coverage that pays medical expenses and lost wages regardless of who caused the accident. But insurers routinely deny, delay, and underpay valid claims — using peer reviews, IME no-shows, and fee schedule defenses to avoid paying providers and injured claimants. Attorney Jason Tenenbaum has litigated thousands of no-fault arbitrations and court cases since 2002.
271 published articles in No-Fault
Keep Reading
More No-Fault Analysis
Car Accident Recorded Statement in New York: Should You Give One?
The at-fault driver's adjuster wants a recorded statement within days of a New York car accident — and that call is designed to weaken your case.
Apr 5, 2026
Who Pays Car Accident Medical Bills in New York? A Step-by-Step Guide
New York no-fault PIP, primary health insurance, Medicaid/Medicare, and litigation liens — the full payment ladder for car-accident medical bills.
Apr 5, 2026
EUO no show – plain and to the point
Missing your EUO can end your no-fault claim. Learn why attendance is mandatory and how to protect your benefits. Call 516-750-0595 for help.
Jun 25, 2023
Interst-ing
Florida court affirms trial court ruling on no-fault insurance interest calculation dispute, applying de minimis doctrine to $4.17 controversy despite Progressive's error.
Oct 21, 2021
Understanding Vehicle “Occupying” Coverage Under NY No-Fault Law
Understand NY no-fault insurance occupying vehicle coverage disputes. Expert Long Island attorneys help with GEICO coverage denials.
Dec 22, 2018
Funny joke – but not sufficient for recusal
A New York appellate court ruled that a judge's joke about seeking employment with opposing counsel didn't warrant recusal, distinguishing it from serious conflicts of interest.
May 24, 2012Was this article helpful?
Disclaimer: This article is published by the Law Office of Jason Tenenbaum, P.C. for informational and educational purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice, and no attorney-client relationship is formed by reading this content. The legal principles discussed may not apply to your specific situation, and the law may have changed since this article was last updated.
New York law varies by jurisdiction — court decisions in one Appellate Division department may not be followed in another, and local court rules in Nassau County Supreme Court differ from those in Suffolk County Supreme Court, Kings County Civil Court, or Queens County Supreme Court. The Appellate Division, Second Department (which covers Long Island, Brooklyn, Queens, and Staten Island) and the Appellate Term (which hears appeals from lower courts) each have distinct procedural requirements and precedents that affect litigation strategy.
If you need legal help with a no-fault matter, contact our office at (516) 750-0595 for a free consultation. We serve clients throughout Long Island (Huntington, Babylon, Islip, Brookhaven, Smithtown, Riverhead, Southampton, East Hampton), Nassau County (Hempstead, Garden City, Mineola, Great Neck, Manhasset, Freeport, Long Beach, Rockville Centre, Valley Stream, Westbury, Hicksville, Massapequa), Suffolk County (Hauppauge, Deer Park, Bay Shore, Central Islip, Patchogue, Brentwood), Queens, Brooklyn, Manhattan, the Bronx, Staten Island, and Westchester County. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
