The fifth time 2106 was invoked

CPLR 2106: A Technical But Powerful Procedural Tool

CPLR 2106 represents one of the more technical aspects of New York procedural law, dealing with who may properly submit affirmations in litigation. While seemingly minor, this rule can have significant impact on cases when attorneys overlook its requirements. The statute prohibits parties to an action from submitting affirmations on their own behalf, requiring instead that such sworn statements come from attorneys or other qualified individuals.

This procedural requirement becomes particularly relevant in no-fault insurance disputes and other commercial litigation where medical practices and professional corporations are frequent litigants. Understanding these technical requirements can be the difference between successful motion practice and having papers rejected by the court.

Jason Tenenbaum’s Analysis:

Crotona Hgts. Med., P.C. v Mercury Ins. Co., 2010 NY Slip Op 52019(U)(App. Term 2d Dept. 2010)

“In opposition to the motion, plaintiff submitted an affirmation executed by its principal, Dr. Cordaro. Defendant objected to that affirmation in its reply papers, citing CPLR 2106. The submission of Dr. Cordaro’s affirmation was improper because Dr. Cordaro is a principal of plaintiff professional corporation, which is a party to the action.”

This was the fifth case where I prevailed on this discreet and hypertechnical issue. I believe this is the final appellate case I have perfected involving this issue. So, the next time you see this issue arise, rest assured that it will not be my doing.

Key Takeaway

CPLR 2106 prohibits parties from submitting affirmations on their own behalf in litigation. This includes corporate principals and owners of professional corporations. While technical, this rule can be decisive in motion practice, as improper affirmations may be rejected by courts, potentially undermining an otherwise strong legal position.

Related Articles

• The CPLR 2106 Trap: Why Medical Practice Owners Must Avoid This Critical Procedural Error
• CPLR 2309 Compliance: Navigating Notarization Requirements in New York Litigation
• Renewal Under Certain Circumstances May Be Granted to Correct an Improper Affirmation: A Comprehensive Guide to CPLR 2106 Requirements
• The Failure to Place Evidence in Proper Form Cannot Be Cured in a Supplemental Opposition
• New York No-Fault Insurance Law

Legal Update (February 2026): CPLR 2106 requirements regarding affirmations by parties and their principals remain substantively unchanged since 2010, though practitioners should verify current provisions as court interpretations and application of these procedural requirements may have evolved through subsequent appellate decisions and practice updates.