Key Takeaway
New York court rules SIU files discoverable when insurer fails to prove litigation privilege, plus limits on stipulations in no-fault insurance cases.
This article is part of our ongoing discovery coverage, with 103 published articles analyzing discovery 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.
All Boro Psychological Servs., P.C. v Allstate Ins. Co., 2013 NY Slip Op 51124(U)(App. Term 2d Dept. 2013)
(1) SIU file is not priveleged
“To avoid having to produce its SIU file, defendant had to establish that its SIU file was prepared solely for litigation (Landmark Ins. Co. v Beau Rivage Rest., 121 AD2d 98, 101 ; see also Bombard v Amica Mut. Ins. Co., 11 AD3d 647 ). As defendant failed to demonstrate that it had decided to deny plaintiff’s claims prior to commencing its investigation, the contents of defendant’s SIU file are not privileged and are discoverable (Bombard, 11 AD3d at 648).”
(2) Stipulation regarding global fact not binding in other litigation
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.
“defendant previously entered into stipulations, in unrelated actions, which, among other things, stated that, as of the date the stipulations were entered into, plaintiff was “in full compliance with any licensing requirements affecting its right to obtain reimbursement under the applicable No Fault laws and regulations.” However, as the issue was resolved in a stipulation and not after it was actually litigated, the doctrine of collateral estoppel is inapplicable”
So the Mallela compliance stipulation is at best limited to the case where the stipulation is signed. The only way to achieve what Mr. All Boro is doing appears to be through a declaratory judgment action
(3) Plaintiff bears the burden to show disclosure is palpably improper
“Since plaintiff failed to establish that the requested discovery is privileged or palpably improper, plaintiff is obligated to produce the information sought. Defendant further established its entitlement to depose Vladimir Grinberg and plaintiff’s owner, Dr. John Braun (see CPLR 3101 ;”
Related Articles
- Appellate Term holds CPLR 3212(f) relief is inappropriate under three separate circumstances
- The spreadsheet was not in admissible form?
- Please be quiet
- Consolidation and belated discovery denied
- New York No-Fault Insurance Law
Legal Update (February 2026): Since this 2013 decision, New York’s discovery rules under CPLR Article 31 have undergone several amendments, and insurance industry practices regarding Special Investigation Unit files may have evolved. Additionally, subsequent appellate decisions may have further clarified the scope of SIU file discoverability and the application of attorney-client privilege in insurance fraud investigations. Practitioners should verify current CPLR provisions and review recent case law developments regarding SIU file discovery and collateral estoppel applications in no-fault insurance disputes.
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
Discovery Practice in New York Courts
Discovery is the pre-trial process through which parties exchange information relevant to the dispute. In New York, discovery practice is governed by CPLR Article 31 and involves depositions, interrogatories, document demands, and physical examinations. Disputes over the scope of discovery, compliance with demands, and sanctions for noncompliance are frequent in both no-fault and personal injury cases. These articles analyze discovery rules, court decisions on discovery disputes, and strategies for effective discovery practice.
103 published articles in Discovery
Keep Reading
More Discovery Analysis
Litigation Funding Disclosure in New York: What Lituma v. Liberty Coca-Cola Means for Both Bars — and for Injured Clients
A NY appellate court allowed defendants to discover third-party litigation funding in a personal injury suit. What Lituma means for both bars and claimants.
Jun 14, 2026
Another Discovery
Appellate Term ruling on discovery objections shows courts won't disturb trial court discretion when defendants fail to timely object within CPLR's 20-day period.
May 22, 2021
Post-Note of Issue Discovery Granted Without Vacating the Note: Cuprill v Citywide Towing
Cuprill v Citywide Towing confirms New York trial courts may permit post-note of issue discovery without vacating the note when neither party is prejudiced.
Apr 6, 2017
EUO no show substantiated
Natural Therapy Acupuncture v State Farm: New York court upholds EUO no-show denial when insurer proves proper mailing and defense counsel confirms non-appearance.
Feb 11, 2014
Remote Depositions for International Parties: Legal Precedent from Long Island and NYC Courts
Learn when NY courts allow remote depositions for international parties. Key 2011 precedent for Long Island & NYC attorneys handling overseas witnesses.
Feb 21, 2011Some newer cases
Recent 2008 New York no-fault insurance procedural decisions on stipulations, discovery sanctions, and precluded defenses affecting Nassau, Suffolk, Queens litigation.
Nov 16, 2008Was 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 discovery 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.
