Key Takeaway
Court rules discovery unnecessary when challenging EUO no-show defense in NY no-fault cases. Appellate Term confirms proper mailing establishes valid denial.
Flatlands Med., P.C. v State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 2013 NY Slip Op 50763(U)(App. Term 2d Dept. 2013)
“Contrary to plaintiff’s argument, the affidavits submitted by defendant established that the EUO scheduling letters and the denial of claim forms, which denied the claim based on plaintiff’s [*2]failure to appear, had been timely mailed (see St. Vincent’s Hosp. of Richmond v Government Empls. Ins. Co., 50 AD3d 1123 ; Delta Diagnostic Radiology, P.C. v Chubb Group of Ins., 17 Misc 3d 16 ). Since plaintiff does not claim to have responded in any way to the EUO request, its objections regarding the EUO requests will not now be heard (see Viviane Etienne Med. Care, P.C. v State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 35 Misc 3d 127, 2012 NY Slip Op 50579 ; Crescent Radiology, PLLC v American Tr. Ins. Co., 31 Misc 3d 134, 2011 NY Slip Op 50622 ), and therefore discovery relevant to the reasonableness of the EUO requests was not necessary to oppose the motion (see CPLR 3212 ).”
Oh how many times do I see the arguments: Discovery is outstanding – the motion for summary judgment on the declaratory judgment action alleging EUO no shows should be stayed. While only one Supreme Court Justice out of 20 have bought this argument, it is nice to see the App. Term shut it down.
Related Articles
- Discovery disallowed when EUO requests are not responded to by deponent
- EUO no show substantiated
- Understanding EUO Requirements in New York No-Fault Insurance Cases
- How to Challenge EUO No-Show Denials: When Improper Notice Can Reverse Insurance Denials in New York
- New York No-Fault Insurance Law
Legal Update (February 2026): Since 2013, New York courts have continued to refine the standards for EUO no-show defenses and discovery requirements in no-fault cases. Practitioners should verify current case law developments regarding waiver of EUO objections, evidentiary standards for proving proper mailing, and any procedural changes affecting summary judgment motions in declaratory judgment actions under CPLR 3212.
