Key Takeaway
Court ruling demonstrates that insurance companies must timely deny claims to preserve fee schedule defenses in New York no-fault litigation.
This article is part of our ongoing fee schedule coverage, with 118 published articles analyzing fee schedule 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.
The timing of insurance company denials plays a crucial role in New York no-fault insurance litigation, particularly when it comes to preserving defenses related to fee schedule limitations. Under New York’s no-fault insurance regulations, insurers have specific timeframes within which they must assert certain defenses, or risk waiving them entirely. This principle becomes especially important in fee schedule disputes, where the amount of reimbursement for medical services is at stake.
The Mercury Casualty Co. v. Encare case from 2011 illustrates a fundamental procedural requirement in no-fault insurance law: the preservation of defenses through timely action. When insurance companies fail to raise fee schedule objections within the required timeframes, they may find themselves unable to rely on those defenses later in litigation. This timing requirement is part of the broader framework of New York no-fault insurance law, which seeks to streamline the claims process while protecting the rights of all parties involved.
The case serves as a reminder that procedural compliance is often just as important as the underlying merits of a dispute. Insurance companies must be vigilant about meeting denial deadlines, whether dealing with standard medical treatments or more specialized procedures like those involving CPT codes for acupuncture or other therapeutic services. The consequences of missing these deadlines can be significant, potentially resulting in the loss of otherwise valid defenses and forcing insurers to pay claims they might have successfully contested if proper procedures had been followed.
Jason Tenenbaum’s Analysis:
Mercury Cas. Co. v Encare, Inc. 2011 NY Slip Op 32166(U)(Sup. Ct. NY Co. 2011)
Do you really think I believed I was going to win this one? To quote a relatively obscure country artist: “This ain’t my last goodbye”. See you on Madison Avenue.
Key Takeaway
This decision reinforces the critical importance of procedural compliance in no-fault insurance disputes. Insurance companies must adhere strictly to denial deadlines to preserve their right to assert fee schedule limitations and other defenses. Missing these deadlines can result in waiver of otherwise meritorious defenses, leaving insurers obligated to pay claims at rates higher than the fee schedule would normally allow. For healthcare providers and their legal representatives, understanding these timing requirements helps ensure proper case strategy and maximizes the likelihood of successful claim resolution.
Legal Update (February 2026): Since this 2011 post, New York’s no-fault regulations have undergone several amendments affecting denial timeframes and fee schedule defense preservation requirements. The Insurance Department has updated various procedural rules and fee schedule provisions that may impact how insurers must assert defenses within required timeframes. Practitioners should verify current regulatory provisions and recent case law developments when advising on denial timing and defense preservation strategies.
Related Articles
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.
About This Topic
Fee Schedule Issues in No-Fault Insurance
The New York no-fault fee schedule establishes the maximum reimbursement rates for medical treatment provided to injured motorists. Disputes over fee schedule calculations, coding, usual and customary charges, and the applicability of workers compensation fee schedules to no-fault claims are common. These articles analyze fee schedule regulations, court decisions on reimbursement disputes, and the practical challenges providers face in obtaining appropriate payment under the no-fault system.
118 published articles in Fee Schedule
Keep Reading
More Fee Schedule Analysis
Acupuncture Reimbursements and Insurance Legalities Explained
Explore the Forrest Chen v. GEICO case and its impact on acupuncture insurance reimbursements in NY. Key insights for providers and patients.
Dec 11, 2024
Simple addition is insufficient
NY court rules simple addition insufficient to prove proper fee schedule calculations in no-fault insurance case, requiring detailed evidence of code utilization.
May 22, 2021
By-Report
Court rules insurers must request additional documentation for "By Report" CPT codes before denying no-fault claims, addressing proper claim procedures.
Nov 4, 2017
Another old fee schedule 20553 reduction case
Court upholds $4,000 to $645.90 fee schedule reduction for CPT code 20553, explaining Ground Rule methodology and potential carrier recoupment analysis.
May 27, 2015
Surprised?
New York appellate court reverses lower court decision in Oriental World Acupuncture v GEICO, highlighting the importance of strategic appellate arguments in no-fault cases.
Jun 18, 2012
Fee schedule defense – competent evidence?
NY insurance carriers must provide competent evidence for fee schedule denials. Long Island personal injury lawyer explains OS Tigris case. Call 516-750-0595.
Oct 11, 2008Common Questions
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the no-fault fee schedule?
New York's no-fault fee schedule, established by the Workers' Compensation Board and the Department of Financial Services, sets the maximum reimbursement rates that no-fault insurers must pay for medical services. When an insurer pays less than the billed amount, citing the fee schedule as a defense, the provider can challenge the reduction by demonstrating that the fee schedule was improperly applied or that the services are not subject to fee schedule limitations.
Can a medical provider charge more than the fee schedule allows?
Medical providers treating no-fault patients are generally limited to the amounts set by the fee schedule and cannot balance-bill the patient for the difference. However, certain services may not be covered by the fee schedule, and disputes about whether a specific service falls within the fee schedule are common in no-fault litigation. The Department of Financial Services periodically updates the fee schedule rates.
How are fee schedule disputes resolved in no-fault arbitration?
When an insurer partially pays a claim citing the fee schedule, the provider can challenge the reduction through no-fault arbitration. The provider must demonstrate that the service billed is not subject to the fee schedule or that the fee schedule was incorrectly applied. The insurer bears the burden of proving the fee schedule applies and the correct rate was used. Fee schedule disputes often involve coding issues, modifier usage, and applicability of Workers' Compensation rates.
Does the no-fault fee schedule apply to all medical services?
Not all medical services are subject to the no-fault fee schedule. Certain services, supplies, and procedures may fall outside its scope, in which case the provider may bill the usual and customary rate. Disputes about whether a specific service or billing code is covered by the fee schedule are common. The Workers' Compensation Board fee schedule and the Department of Financial Services ground rules guide which services are covered and at what rates.
Was this article helpful?
About the Author
Jason Tenenbaum, Esq.
Jason Tenenbaum is the founding attorney of the Law Office of Jason Tenenbaum, P.C., headquartered at 326 Walt Whitman Road, Suite C, Huntington Station, New York 11746. With over 24 years of experience since founding the firm in 2002, Jason has written more than 1,000 appeals, handled over 100,000 no-fault insurance cases, and recovered over $100 million for clients across Long Island, Nassau County, Suffolk County, Queens, Brooklyn, Manhattan, the Bronx, and Staten Island. He is one of the few attorneys in the state who both writes his own appellate briefs and tries his own cases.
Jason is admitted to practice in New York, New Jersey, Florida, Texas, Georgia, and Michigan state courts, as well as multiple federal courts. His 2,353+ published legal articles analyzing New York case law, procedural developments, and litigation strategy make him one of the most prolific legal commentators in the state. He earned his Juris Doctor from Syracuse University College of Law.
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 fee schedule 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.
