Why Trust This Analysis
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.
No-fault insurance cases often involve complex calculations when determining interest on overdue payments to healthcare providers. The interplay between statutory requirements and tolling provisions can significantly impact the final amount owed, making precise legal analysis crucial for both providers and insurers.
In medical billing disputes under New York No-Fault Insurance Law, courts must carefully examine whether interest should be calculated from the original due date or whether certain circumstances warrant tolling the interest period. This becomes particularly important when substantial time has passed since the original billing, as compound interest can dramatically increase the total amount due.
Jason Tenenbaum’s Analysis:
Devonshire Surgical Facility v American Transit Insurance Company, 2011 NY Slip Op 51660(U)(App. Term 1st Dept. 2011)
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.
“laintiffs made a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law on their claims for first-party no-fault benefits by submitting proof that the prescribed statutory billing forms had been mailed and received by defendant on January 22, 2001, and that payment was overdue”
“We remand the matter to Civil Court for calculation of the appropriate interest due plaintiff on these claims, taking into account the applicability, if any, of the tolling provisions of Insurance Law § 5106(a) (see 11 NYCRR 65.15 ; LMK Psychological Servs., P.C. v State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 12 NY3d 217, 223 ; Brooklyn Chiropractic Assoc., P.C. v Progressive Cas. Ins. Co., 17 Misc 3d 13, 15 ).”
I guess when compound interest is in play, we see the worst in people.
Key Takeaway
This case demonstrates the critical importance of proper interest calculations in no-fault insurance disputes. While the court established the provider’s right to payment, the complex tolling provisions under Insurance Law § 5106(a) required remand for precise calculation, highlighting how procedural details can significantly impact the final judgment amount in medical billing cases.
Related Articles
- Understanding the CPLR 3212(g) paradigm for summary judgment motions
- Critical timing rules under CPLR 3212(a) for summary judgment motions
- When reasonable excuse defenses apply despite jurisdictional challenges
- No-fault verification requirements and compliance standards
- New York No-Fault Insurance Law
Legal Update (February 2026): Since this 2011 post, Insurance Law § 5106 and its implementing regulations under 11 NYCRR Part 65 have undergone several amendments affecting interest calculations and tolling provisions in no-fault cases. Additionally, court interpretations of interest tolling in medical billing disputes may have evolved through subsequent appellate decisions. Practitioners should verify current statutory provisions and recent case law when analyzing interest calculations in no-fault insurance matters.
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
Long Island Motorcycle Accidents: What You Need to Know
Learn about motorcycle accident claims, personal injury coverage, and no-fault insurance. Expert guide for riders seeking compensation.
Jan 15, 2025
My body my choice
New York court affirms plaintiff's right to undergo surgery before independent medical examination, rejecting defendant's spoliation claims in personal injury case.
Dec 8, 2021
Another hiccup to the briefing schedule rule
Learn about court briefing schedule rules and judicial discretion in New York no-fault insurance cases. Expert legal analysis of Golden Star decision.
Jun 21, 2019
The amendments to the regulations and what they mean to you.
The 2013 Regulation 68-C amendment, its effective-date limits, verification and denial provisions, and what Chapa clarified about the 120-day rule in 2026.
Feb 14, 2013Was 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.
