Five Boro Psychological Servs., P.C. v State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 2011 NY Slip Op 51846(U)(App. Term 2d Dept. 2011)
“Furthermore, contrary to the Civil Court’s determination, there is no requirement that EUO scheduling letters conspicuously highlight the information contained therein (see Insurance Department Regulations [11 NYCRR] § 65-3.5 [b], [e])”
At the Law Office of Jason Tenenbaum, our attorneys have the integrity and experience you need to best assist, advise, and support you through your legal challenge, every step of the way.
Using cutting-edge technology and strategy to solve complicated problems.
We can fight for your pain and suffering, lost income, medical bills, and any future lost wages.
You have the right to bring a malpractice claim for your medical expenses, lost income and pain and suffering.
If you have been sued for an unpaid consumer loan, fallen behind on your credit card bills or similar.
We can help when you are faced with commercial litigation issues.
We work hard to fight for your individual case and rights, while providing superior legal services on a timely, effective, and efficient basis.
Proin rhoncus metus aliquet blandit ad placerat sociosqu erat vel letius scelerisque taciti pulvinar.
Proin rhoncus metus aliquet blandit ad placerat sociosqu erat vel letius scelerisque taciti pulvinar.
One Response
What a pity. Because if the Appellate Term decided that highlighting was required, imagine the litigation over the question of which kind of highlighting qualifies: bold; italic; red ink; yellow background; or perhaps some combination. How can people be expected to apprehend the importance of words that look pretty much like all the other words?