More MUA – this one is over the top
Court case analysis examining chiropractor MUA billing disputes under NY no-fault fee schedules, including rate limitations and multiple procedure rules.
More MUA – this one is over the top — Read More →29 articles published in March 2012
The articles below were published in March 2012 by Attorney Jason Tenenbaum and the legal team at his Long Island law office. Each article provides detailed analysis of real court decisions, statutory developments, and procedural issues in New York personal injury, no-fault insurance, and employment law.
Attorney Tenenbaum has maintained this legal blog since 2008, creating one of the most comprehensive public archives of New York insurance and personal injury case law analysis available online. Every article draws on his firsthand experience litigating cases in Nassau County District Court, Suffolk County courts, New York City Civil Court, and the Appellate Term. Unlike generic legal content, these articles cite specific case holdings, analyze judicial reasoning, and identify practical takeaways for attorneys and claimants navigating New York's complex legal landscape.
Whether you are an attorney researching a procedural question, an insurance professional evaluating a claim, or an individual trying to understand your legal rights after an accident or workplace dispute, this archive offers substantive legal analysis grounded in real New York courtroom experience. For case-specific legal advice, contact the Law Office of Jason Tenenbaum at (516) 750-0595 for a free consultation.
Court case analysis examining chiropractor MUA billing disputes under NY no-fault fee schedules, including rate limitations and multiple procedure rules.
More MUA – this one is over the top — Read More →New York Court of Appeals clarifies that property owners need only notice of conditions, not that they knew those conditions were dangerous for negligence claims.
Knowledge is quite a broad term — Read More →Court applies CPLR 5520 to treat defective appeal as valid when appellant failed to appeal reargument order that superseded original order.
5520 applies to reargument orders that were never appealed — Read More →Get expert legal analysis on Major medical carrier taken to the mat for unscrupulous conduct from Law Office of Jason Tenenbaum | Personal Injury Lawyers
Major medical carrier taken to the mat for unscrupulous conduct — Read More →Doctor convicted of insurance fraud for falsifying no-fault C-4 forms, showing patient as disabled when they were working. Court upheld conviction based on consistent witness testimony.
Another no-fault physician commits insurance fraud — Read More →Court analysis of four accidents determining which qualify for serious injury under 5102(d), examining significant limitation vs permanent consequential categories.
They call her crash — Read More →Fourth Department ruling on CPLR 305(c) caption amendments in no-fault cases - when substitution fails and proper procedural requirements for changing party names.
When can you "change the caption"? — Read More →Court case examines objective medical tests for proving continuing disability in personal injury cases, including EMG tests, straight leg tests, and muscle spasm documentation.
What are objective signs of continuing disability? — Read More →Court grants renewal motion after law office failure, defendant wins summary judgment in no-fault insurance case when plaintiff fails to raise triable issues of fact.
Renewal granted and Plaintiff loses. — Read More →Civil Court overturns Appellate Term precedent on no-fault peer review expert testimony, ruling original peer reviewer must testify at trial
Civil Court overturns Appellate Term precedent — Read More →Pearson v Miles demonstrates how failing to properly allege the 90/180 day injury category in a bill of particulars can doom a no-fault threshold case.
A bad day for Mr. Pearson — Read More →Court case demonstrates how mailing discrepancies can undermine no-fault insurance claims when dates don't align with alleged service dates.
Mailing discrepencies and the way to prove non-receipt — Read More →Burns v Kaplan case analysis: psychotherapist sues patient for missed appointment fee, patient claims medical emergency defense in small claims court dispute.
Would you go to this psychologist? — Read More →Court ruling demonstrates that a treating physician's letter of medical necessity can create sufficient factual disputes to defeat summary judgment in no-fault insurance cases.
Letter of medical necessity sufficient to raise an issue of fact — Read More →Rally Chiropractic v Nationwide case ruling on no-fault coverage denial due to assignor not regularly residing with insured under NY regulations.
No coverage due to lack of proof regarding Claimant's status as resident relative — Read More →New York Appellate Term denies insurer's motion to dismiss acupuncture provider's claim for initial session, reinforcing provider rights under no-fault law.
Another motion to dismiss an initial acupuncture session is denied — Read More →Court ruling shows hospitals must prove their records qualify as business records for summary judgment in no-fault cases, adding procedural hurdle.
Business record rule applies to hospitals also — Read More →Court ruling clarifies that electronic signatures placed at the direction of the signor are legally valid, even when appearing as facsimile stamps on peer review reports.
A signature placed at the direction of the signor — Read More →New York appellate court reinforces requirement for insurance carriers to properly submit fee schedules as evidence in acupuncture reimbursement disputes under no-fault law.
Acupuncture fee schedule (again) — Read More →Court dismisses no-fault case after plaintiff objects to inadmissible proof, highlighting importance of sworn medical reports and hearsay rules in New York.
Objected to inadmissible proof spells doom — Read More →New York appellate court addresses key evidentiary issues including hearsay exceptions, interrogatory use for impeachment, and harmless error doctrine in civil litigation.
Some evidentiary issues – — Read More →Appellate Term reverses trial court's exclusion of substitute expert testimony in no-fault medical necessity case, with strong dissent on expert testimony scope.
Another substitute peer case finds it way back on remand – but the dissent is potent — Read More →A 2012 case highlights how insurance companies must properly establish EUO scheduling to avoid losing their right to deny claims based on no-shows.
A lesson on why the failure to attempt a DJ on an EUO no-show can spell doom — Read More →Court grants summary judgment based on biomechanical engineer's conclusion that claimed injuries could not have resulted from the accident, shifting burden to plaintiff.
Lack of causation proven prima facie through a biomechanical study — Read More →Appellate Term rules Mallela defense doesn't require formal pleading - adequate allegations of fraudulent incorporation sufficient for discovery rights
A Mallela defense does not have to be pleaded — Read More →Court reverses personal injury verdict due to attorney's abusive summation and improper cross-examination tactics that denigrated medical experts and witnesses.
Abusive summation and cross-examination causes this case to go back to trial — Read More →CPLR 3212(b) motion requirements: when affidavit from movant is necessary for summary judgment in New York courts, based on Maragos v Sakurai case analysis.
3212(b) motion – affidavit from movant necessary — Read More →Court strikes expert affidavit when plaintiff failed to identify expert during discovery phase, emphasizing importance of timely disclosure under CPLR 3101(d).
3101(d) gone awry? — Read More →Cividanes v City of New York case analysis examining "use and operation" requirements for no-fault coverage when plaintiff injured exiting bus into pothole.
Use and Operation — Read More →The Law Office of Jason Tenenbaum publishes legal analysis on a regular basis covering developments in New York personal injury litigation, no-fault insurance disputes, employment discrimination, and related practice areas. Attorney Tenenbaum started writing about New York case law in 2008, and the blog has grown into a library of over 2,353 articles analyzing court decisions from the Appellate Term, Appellate Division, and Court of Appeals.
Topics frequently covered include the prima facie case standard in no-fault actions, the 30-day preclusion rule under Insurance Regulation 192, IME and EUO no-show defenses, summary judgment practice under CPLR 3212, default judgment standards, verification and claims submission procedures, and the serious injury threshold under Insurance Law Section 5102(d). Employment law articles address wrongful termination, workplace discrimination under the New York State Human Rights Law, wage and hour violations, and employer retaliation claims.
Each article is written for a professional audience but remains accessible to non-lawyers seeking to understand how New York courts handle specific legal issues. The firm serves clients across Long Island, including Nassau County, Suffolk County, and the five boroughs of New York City. If you have a legal question about any topic covered in these articles, call (516) 750-0595 for a free, confidential consultation.
New York's civil court system is one of the most complex in the nation, with multiple overlapping jurisdictions that affect how personal injury, no-fault insurance, and employment cases are litigated. The New York City Civil Court handles claims up to $25,000 in the five boroughs, while the District Courts in Nassau and Suffolk Counties handle similar matters on Long Island. For claims exceeding $25,000, the Supreme Court serves as the primary trial court with unlimited monetary jurisdiction. Despite its name, the Supreme Court is not the highest court in New York — that distinction belongs to the Court of Appeals, which sits in Albany and decides approximately 200 cases per year.
Appeals from Civil Court and District Court decisions go to the Appellate Term, which is divided into departments corresponding to the Appellate Division. The Appellate Term for the Second Department — which covers Nassau County, Suffolk County, Kings County (Brooklyn), Queens County, and Richmond County (Staten Island) — hears hundreds of no-fault insurance appeals each year and has developed a substantial body of case law on topics including timely denial, verification procedures, proof of mailing, fee schedule disputes, and medical necessity standards. The Appellate Division, Second Department, hears appeals from Supreme Court and from the Appellate Term, and its decisions are binding on all lower courts within its jurisdiction.
Understanding where your case falls within this system is critical. A no-fault insurance dispute involving a $3,000 medical bill will follow a very different procedural path than a $500,000 personal injury claim arising from the same automobile accident. The former is typically resolved through mandatory arbitration before the American Arbitration Association under Insurance Department Regulation 68, while the latter proceeds through Supreme Court with full discovery, independent medical examinations under CPLR 3121, depositions, and potentially a jury trial. Attorney Tenenbaum has practiced extensively in all of these venues and understands the strategic considerations unique to each.
Several statutes and regulations appear frequently in the articles archived on this page. Insurance Law Article 51 establishes New York's no-fault insurance framework, requiring every motor vehicle policy to include personal injury protection benefits covering medical expenses, lost earnings (up to $2,000 per month), and other basic economic loss up to $50,000 per person. 11 NYCRR 65-3.8 (Insurance Regulation 192) imposes a 30-day deadline on insurers to pay or deny no-fault claims after receiving proof of claim and all demanded verification, and the failure to timely deny results in preclusion of most coverage defenses.
In personal injury litigation, Insurance Law Section 5102(d) defines the categories of "serious injury" that a plaintiff must establish before recovering non-economic damages in a motor vehicle accident case. The nine categories — death, dismemberment, significant disfigurement, fracture, loss of a fetus, permanent loss of use, permanent consequential limitation, significant limitation of use, and the 90/180-day category — each have specific evidentiary requirements that have been refined through decades of appellate decisions. The Law Office of Jason Tenenbaum has litigated serious injury threshold motions in hundreds of cases and regularly writes about new developments in this area.
Employment claims in New York implicate both state and federal statutes. The New York State Human Rights Law (Executive Law Section 296) prohibits employment discrimination based on age, race, creed, color, national origin, sexual orientation, gender identity, military status, sex, disability, predisposing genetic characteristics, familial status, marital status, and domestic violence victim status. The New York City Human Rights Law provides even broader protections and applies a more liberal standard. At the federal level, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act provide additional protections but are subject to administrative exhaustion requirements through the EEOC.
Workers' compensation cases in New York are governed by the Workers' Compensation Law and administered by the Workers' Compensation Board. Injured workers are entitled to medical treatment, lost wage benefits (typically two-thirds of the average weekly wage, subject to a statutory maximum), and permanency awards for lasting disabilities. Third-party claims — such as personal injury lawsuits against property owners or general contractors under Labor Law Sections 200, 240, and 241 — often run parallel to workers' compensation proceedings and involve complex lien and subrogation issues that require experienced legal counsel to navigate properly.
The articles in this archive analyze real decisions from courts across New York State, with a particular focus on the Appellate Term and Appellate Division decisions that establish binding precedent for trial courts on Long Island and in New York City. Whether you are an attorney preparing a motion, an insurance professional evaluating a claim, or an individual trying to understand your rights, these articles provide the detailed legal analysis that generic legal websites simply cannot offer. For personalized advice about your specific situation, contact the Law Office of Jason Tenenbaum at (516) 750-0595.
The Law Office of Jason Tenenbaum, P.C. serves clients from its office at 326 Walt Whitman Road, Suite C, Huntington Station, New York 11746. The firm represents individuals and businesses throughout Long Island — including the towns of Babylon, Islip, Brookhaven, Smithtown, Riverhead, Southampton, East Hampton, Huntington, and Oyster Bay in Suffolk County, and the cities and villages of Hempstead, Garden City, Mineola, Great Neck, Manhasset, Freeport, Long Beach, Rockville Centre, Valley Stream, Westbury, Hicksville, Massapequa, and Levittown in Nassau County. The firm also handles cases in all five boroughs of New York City: Queens, Brooklyn (Kings County), Manhattan (New York County), the Bronx, and Staten Island (Richmond County). Court appearances are regularly made at Nassau County Supreme Court in Mineola, Suffolk County Supreme Court in Riverhead, the Nassau County District Court, the Suffolk County District Court, and the New York City Civil Court throughout the five boroughs.
Injured? Don't Wait.
Get Your Free Case Evaluation Today
No fees unless we win — available 24/7 for emergencies.