Spell it out in the affidavit

The Critical Importance of Personal Knowledge in Legal Affidavits

In no-fault insurance litigation, healthcare providers frequently face challenges when insurance companies claim they never received requested verification documents. A 2010 appellate court decision demonstrates why attorneys must be extremely careful about what they attest to in legal affidavits — particularly when it comes to having actual personal knowledge of the facts they’re swearing to.

This case from St. Vincent’s Hospital illustrates a common scenario in New York No-Fault Insurance Law disputes: an insurance company requesting additional verification, the healthcare provider responding with the requested documents, and then the insurer claiming the materials were never received. The outcome hinged on a fundamental principle of evidence law that often gets overlooked in the heat of litigation.

Jason Tenenbaum’s Analysis:

St. Vincent’s Hosp. & Med. Ctr. v American Tr. Ins. Co., 2010 NY Slip Op 52063(U)(App. Term 2d Dept. 2010)

“As defendant was already in possession, prior to its verification requests, of the subject NF-5 forms, which each bore notations that the assignor’s signature was “on file,” defendant’s verification requests, in effect, sought a copy of the document(s) “on file” which had been signed by the assignors. Since SVHMC established that it had, in response to the verification requests, provided defendant with copies of the authorizations to release information and the assignments executed by the assignors, SVHMC established that it had complied with those requests. While defendant’s attorney asserted that defendant had never received the signed assignment of benefits forms, defendant’s attorney’s affirmation was without probative value as defendant’s attorney lacked personal knowledge of same”

Do you see what was missing from Appellant’s answering papers?

Key Takeaway

The court rejected the insurance company’s claim of non-receipt because their attorney’s affirmation lacked personal knowledge. This ruling demonstrates that attorneys cannot simply assert facts they don’t personally know to be true. For more examples of verification non-receipt issues and guidance on how insurers must prove they never received verification, legal practitioners must ensure their affidavits are based on actual firsthand knowledge rather than assumptions or hearsay.

Legal Update (February 2026): Since this 2010 post, New York’s no-fault insurance regulations have undergone multiple amendments affecting verification procedures, documentation requirements, and affidavit standards. The Insurance Department has updated fee schedules and revised procedural requirements for additional verification requests that may impact the analysis discussed in this post. Practitioners should verify current provisions under 11 NYCRR Part 65 and recent case law developments regarding personal knowledge requirements in no-fault litigation affidavits.