Key Takeaway
Critical analysis of CPLR 2106 expert report authentication requirements in NY litigation. Expert legal guidance for Long Island attorneys. Call (516) 750-0595.
Understanding CPLR 2106 and Expert Report Requirements in Long Island and New York City Litigation
When navigating complex personal injury and insurance litigation across Long Island and New York City, one of the most critical procedural requirements involves the proper authentication and submission of expert reports. The intersection of CPLR 2106 requirements with notarization procedures creates particular challenges for attorneys handling cases in Nassau County, Suffolk County, and throughout the five boroughs.
For residents of the greater New York metropolitan area dealing with insurance disputes, understanding how expert testimony and reports are authenticated can make the difference between a successful claim and a dismissed case. The procedural requirements for expert reports are not merely technicalities—they are essential safeguards that ensure the reliability and admissibility of professional opinions in court.
The Quality Psychological Services Decision: A Critical CPLR 2106 Analysis
Quality Psychological Servs., P.C. v New York Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 2013 NY Slip Op 50063(U)(App. Term 2d Dept. 2013)
“Defendant also submitted a peer review report of its psychologist, to which plaintiff objected in its opposing papers on the ground that the report was not in proper form. The Civil Court correctly held that the peer review report was not in admissible form because, pursuant to CPLR 2106, defendant’s psychologist could not affirm the truth of the statements contained therein (see Pascucci v Wilke, 60 AD3d 486 ) and while the peer review report contained a notary public’s stamp and signature, it contained no attestation that the psychologist had been duly sworn or that she had appeared before the notary public“
Do I read the “or” as meaning that it would be acceptable if the psychologist has given an acknowledgment, which was sworn to a notary? Isn’t an oath when you swear to the truth of something?
Just seems odd.
Understanding CPLR 2106: The Foundation of Expert Report Authentication
What is CPLR 2106?
CPLR 2106 governs the verification requirements for papers submitted in New York State courts. This rule is particularly crucial when dealing with expert reports, medical records, and professional opinions that form the backbone of personal injury and insurance cases throughout Long Island and New York City.
The Two-Pronged Problem in Quality Psychological Services
The Quality Psychological Services case illustrates two distinct but related problems with expert report submission:
Problem #1: Professional Limitation Under CPLR 2106
The court noted that the psychologist “could not affirm the truth of the statements contained therein.” This reflects a fundamental limitation on who can verify certain types of professional reports.
Problem #2: Insufficient Notarization
Even though the report contained a notary public’s stamp and signature, it lacked proper attestation that the psychologist had been “duly sworn” or had “appeared before the notary public.”
Frequently Asked Questions About Expert Report Authentication
Q: Can a psychologist verify their own expert report under CPLR 2106?
A: The Quality Psychological Services case suggests that there may be limitations on certain professionals’ ability to verify their own reports. The specific language “could not affirm the truth of the statements contained therein” indicates potential professional or statutory restrictions.
Q: What’s the difference between being “duly sworn” and simply having a notary stamp?
A: Being “duly sworn” requires the expert to take an oath before the notary, swearing that the contents of the report are true. A notary stamp alone, without evidence of the oath procedure, is insufficient under the Quality Psychological Services standard.
Q: What happens if an expert report is rejected for improper verification?
A: The report may be inadmissible as evidence, potentially weakening or destroying a party’s case. In some situations, courts may allow re-submission with proper verification if deadlines permit.
Get Expert Help with Your Procedural Challenges
If you’re facing a complex personal injury case, insurance dispute, or other litigation matter that requires expert testimony, don’t let procedural technicalities derail your case. The Law Office of Jason Tenenbaum understands the intricate requirements of CPLR 2106 and other procedural rules that can make or break your claim.
Whether you’re in Nassau County, Suffolk County, or anywhere in the five boroughs of New York City, we’re here to ensure that procedural technicalities work for you, not against you.
Call (516) 750-0595 today for a consultation about your case. Don’t let improper expert report verification cost you the compensation you deserve.
Related Articles
- The CPLR 2106 Trap: Why Medical Practice Owners Must Avoid This Critical Procedural Error
- CPLR 2309 Compliance: Navigating Notarization Requirements in New York Litigation
- Renewal Under Certain Circumstances May Be Granted to Correct an Improper Affirmation: A Comprehensive Guide to CPLR 2106 Requirements
- CPLR 2309 Requirements: Understanding Affidavit Attestation Rules from the Appellate Division, Second Department
- New York No-Fault Insurance Law
Legal Update (February 2026): Since this 2013 analysis of CPLR 2106 expert report requirements, there may have been amendments to authentication procedures, changes in notarization requirements, or updates to court rules governing the submission and form of expert reports. Practitioners should verify current CPLR 2106 provisions and any related procedural updates that may affect expert report admissibility requirements.
