Key Takeaway
Ashraf Ashour allowed renewal after companion-case papers were filed by mistake. The corrected proof led to dismissal of the no-fault claims.
This article is part of our ongoing fee schedule coverage, with 466 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.
Last reviewed: September 2026
The insurer filed the wrong case’s papers. It then explained the mistake, supplied the correct record and won renewal. The court also dismissed the provider’s claims.
Historical note: This 2012 result rests on the corrected motion record, not current reimbursement rates; Joyous JD Ltd v Yolanda Mgt. illustrates why invoking inadvertence alone may still fail.
Permission to renew, then the merits
Ashraf Ashour, P.T. v Interboro Ins. Co., 34 Misc 3d 160(A) (App Term, 1st Dept 2012), accepted law-office error as the explanation for the mistaken submission. The corrected papers also supplied a meritorious defense.
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.
The different claims had different grounds for dismissal: payment, an unrebutted independent medical examination, and compliance with the applicable fee schedule. The court granted the defendant summary judgment. A corrected caption or a replacement affidavit alone would not explain those outcomes.
Read this as a 2012 motion record
The decision is not a current fee-schedule table or a promise that an inadvertent filing earns renewal. Joyous, cited above, shows why a bare explanation of mistake may fail. Counsel comparing the cases should examine the actual explanation and what the replacement evidence establishes.
The claims’ payment and medical-necessity issues can be followed through the New York no-fault law overview. This note preserves the procedural result without importing old reimbursement figures into current advice.
Jason’s original comment
Jason identified the matter in his original note. That self-report is preserved; this review does not independently verify his role in the litigation.
This was my case.
Connect to the Encyclopedia
- CPLR 2221: governing rule and related decisions
- Provek: explaining an employment-date mistake
- Ferrara: correcting the form of medical proof
- Abrams: diligence after a missing witness was located
- Dookhie: answering an opponent’s new reply argument
- Terio: late reargument while an appeal was pending
For review of a particular motion record or an attorney referral, contact the Law Office of Jason Tenenbaum.
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.
466 published articles in Fee Schedule
Keep Reading
More Fee Schedule Analysis
How to Talk to a Judge in New York: What to Say, What to Avoid, and How to Present Yourself
Address the judge as 'Your Honor,' stand when you speak, wait to be recognized, and keep answers short and honest. A Long Island trial lawyer explains.
Feb 24, 2026
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
More plaintiffs fail to rebut an insurance carrier’s medical utilization report
Three recent no-fault insurance cases demonstrate how plaintiffs consistently fail to provide adequate medical expert testimony to rebut insurance carriers' utilization reports.
Nov 27, 2010
Written opposition – the key to beating people on procedural defects
Master written opposition strategies to defeat procedural challenges in NY courts.
Jan 25, 2009
2106 and a prima facie comment
Pugsley rejected the insurer's IME affirmation but also denied the provider's cross motion. See the report's ownership, overdue proof and current rule.
Feb 20, 2016
Initial visit allowed – open question being how much
Flushing Traditional's 2013 code 99202 claim survived dismissal, but neither side won summary judgment on it. The initial-visit distinction.
Sep 25, 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 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.
