Key Takeaway
Court of Appeals decision on no-fault insurance claims showing plaintiff's burden of proof and proper use of denial forms as evidence in New York cases.
This article is part of our ongoing 4404(a) & weight of evidence review coverage, with 152 published articles analyzing 4404(a) & weight of evidence review 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.
When will certain Plaintiffs and their law firms realize that it is okay to occasionally lose in Civil Court. Look at the the mess that Plaintiff has now created for itself. By the way, look at the bolded section of this opinion. Why did you do this to yourself Mr. Five Boro?
Five Boro Psychological Servs., P.C. v Progressive Northeastern Ins. Co., 2011 NY Slip Op 51528(U)(App. Term 2d Dept. 2011)
“Plaintiff argues on appeal that, because defendant failed to attach a copy of the bill at issue in this case to its motion papers, the Civil Court could not have been able to identify the bill at issue and, thus, defendant’s motion should have been denied. This contention is without merit. The complaint in this matter identified the sole bill at issue (see CPLR 3013), and defendant attached the complaint to its motion papers as required by CPLR 3212 (b). Accordingly, there could not have been any question as to the identity of the bill which is the subject of this action.”
“efendant was not relying on for th purpose. It is plaintiff’s burden, not defendant’s, to prove the elements of plaintiff’s cause of action. Defendant submitted the denial of claim form to show that it was sent and that the claim was therefore denied (see Five Boro Psychological Servs., P.C. v Progressive Northeastern Ins. Co., 27 Misc 3d 141, 2010 NY Slip Op 50991 ; Quality Health Prods., Inc. v NY Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 27 Misc 3d 141, 2010 NY Slip Op 50990 ). Since defendant did not submit the denial of claim form for a hearsay purpose, defendant was not required to lay a CPLR 4518 foundation for its admissibility”
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
- Civil Court decisions in no-fault insurance cases and flawed legal reasoning
- Court guidance on the business records exception
- Written opposition as key to beating procedural defects
- Uncertified police report inadmissibility issues
- New York No-Fault Insurance Law
Legal Update (February 2026): Since this 2011 decision, there have been ongoing developments in no-fault insurance regulations, including potential amendments to claims processing requirements, billing procedures, and verification of medical service documentation under Insurance Department regulations. Practitioners should verify current provisions regarding burden of proof standards in no-fault actions and any updated requirements for motion practice documentation under CPLR 3212.
Legal Context
Why This Matters for Your Case
New York law is among the most complex and nuanced in the country, with distinct procedural rules, substantive doctrines, and court systems that differ significantly from other jurisdictions. The Civil Practice Law and Rules (CPLR) governs every stage of civil litigation, from service of process through trial and appeal. The Appellate Division, Appellate Term, and Court of Appeals create a rich and ever-evolving body of case law that practitioners must follow.
Attorney Jason Tenenbaum has practiced across these areas for over 24 years, writing more than 1,000 appellate briefs and publishing over 2,353 legal articles that attorneys and clients rely on for guidance. The analysis in this article reflects real courtroom experience — from motion practice in Civil Court and Supreme Court to oral arguments before the Appellate Division — and a deep understanding of how New York courts actually apply the law in practice.
Keep Reading
More 4404(a) & weight of evidence review Analysis
CPLR § 2106 Amendment Eliminates Affidavit Notarization Requirement: What This Means for New York Litigation
New York's CPLR 2106 permits affirmations in place of many sworn documents. See the 2024 and 2025 changes, exceptions, and historical case notes.
Feb 18, 2026
4518(a)
Analysis of double hearsay issues in motor vehicle accident cases, examining inadmissible police reports and the business records exception under New York evidence law.
Sep 25, 2020
An affidavit is not be admissible at trial – You knew this already
Learn why affidavits cannot be used at trial in New York courts.
Nov 8, 2009
Business records and copies
New York court case analysis on business records admissibility, secondary evidence rules, and CPLR 4539(a) requirements for document authentication in litigation.
Feb 23, 2017
And why do you think the signature was stamped?
Court rejects challenge to peer review report based solely on claim of stamped signature, emphasizing need for expert proof in no-fault insurance disputes.
Oct 27, 2013
Prima facie again
New York courts continue to refine prima facie standards for business records evidence in no-fault insurance cases, with recent Appellate Term and Fourth Department decisions.
Oct 8, 2010Was 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 4404(a) & weight of evidence review 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.
