Tax records denied in Mallela based disclosure matter

Understanding Discovery Limits: When Insurance Companies Can’t Access Tax Records

In no-fault insurance litigation, disputes often arise over what documents and information insurance carriers can demand during the discovery process. The tension between an insurer’s right to investigate claims and a medical provider’s privacy rights creates complex legal issues that courts must carefully balance.

Tax records represent particularly sensitive financial information, and New York courts have established strict standards before allowing their disclosure. This protection exists because tax returns contain comprehensive financial data that may not be relevant to the specific claims at issue, yet could expose private business information unnecessarily.

The case of W.W. Med., P.C. v Allstate Ins. Co. illustrates how courts apply these protective standards in practice. While insurance companies frequently seek broad discovery to investigate potential fraud or verify damages, they must meet specific legal thresholds to access the most sensitive documents. Understanding these limits is crucial for both medical providers defending against disclosure motions and insurers crafting their discovery strategies.

Jason Tenenbaum’s Analysis:

W.W. Med., P.C. v Allstate Ins. Co., 2013 NY Slip Op 51743(U)(App. Term 2d Dept. 2013)

“It is well settled that tax returns are generally not discoverable in the absence of a strong showing that the information is indispensable to the claim and cannot be obtained from other sources” (Altidor v State-Wide Ins. Co., 22 AD3d 435 ; see also Benfeld v Fleming Props., LLC, 44 AD3d 599 ). Here, defendant failed to demonstrate that plaintiff’s tax returns were properly discoverable and, as a result, at this juncture, defendant’s request for such documentation should have been denied. Defendant, however, established its [*2]entitlement to depose Dr. Wilkins Williams (see CPLR 3101 ; see also All Boro Psychological Servs., P.C., 40 Misc 3d 131, 2013 NY Slip Op 51124). In light of the foregoing, the Civil Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the branch of plaintiff’s cross motion seeking a protective order.”

The insurance carrier is not entitled to tax records absent special circumstances, which on this record and at this point were non-existent.

Key Takeaway

Courts strictly limit access to tax records in no-fault litigation, requiring insurance companies to prove the information is “indispensable” and unavailable elsewhere. This decision reinforces that broad fishing expeditions for sensitive financial documents will not be permitted without compelling justification tied to the specific claims at issue.

Related Articles

• NY EBT Venue Rules: When Courts Grant Undue Hardship Exceptions for Depositions
• Appellate Term holds CPLR 3212(f) relief is inappropriate under three separate circumstances
• The spreadsheet was not in admissible form?
• The failure of an assignor to appear for an EBT is not a basis for a 3126 sanction against the assignee
• New York No-Fault Insurance Law

Legal Update (February 2026): Since this 2013 decision, New York’s discovery rules under CPLR 3101 have been subject to various amendments and judicial interpretations that may affect the standards for compelling disclosure of tax records in no-fault insurance litigation. Additionally, changes to privacy regulations and court procedures may have modified the balancing test between insurer investigation rights and provider confidentiality protections. Practitioners should verify current CPLR provisions and recent case law developments when addressing similar disclosure disputes.