Key Takeaway
New York court ruling on EUO preclusion and EBT rights based on preserved box 18 defense in no-fault insurance cases - key timing requirements explained.
This article is part of our ongoing discovery coverage, with 297 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.
Megacure Acupuncture, P.C. v Lancer Ins. Co., 2013 NY Slip Op 51994(U)(App. Term 2d Dept. 2013)
(1) “We note that defendant’s February 13, 2007 letter purporting to delay payment of the claims was not mailed within 15 days of defendant’s receipt of any of these claims and, in any event, is insufficient to toll the 30-day statutory time period within which a claim must be paid or denied (see ARCO Med. NY, P.C. v Lancer Ins. Co., 34 Misc 3d 135, 2011 NY Slip Op 52384 ; Points of Health Acupuncture, P.C. v Lancer Ins. Co., 28 Misc 3d 133, 2010 NY Slip Op 51338 ).
It looks like the EUO provider delay letters were not timely delayed; therefore, the EUO no-show defense was precluded.
(2) “Although the follow-up EUO scheduling letter was sent less than 30 days after the initial request (see Insurance Department Regulations § 65-3.6 ), where, as here, the verification sought is an EUO, a follow-up request is not premature when sent within 10 days after the failure to appear for the initial scheduled examination (see ARCO Med. NY, P.C., 37 Misc 3d 136, 2012 NY Slip Op 52178; ARCO Med., NY, P.C., 34 Misc 3d 135, 2011 NY Slip Op 52384)”
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.
A follow-up request must be sent within 10-days after the failure to appear for the initial examination
(3) “With respect to defendant’s motion to compel plaintiff to produce Tatyana Kapustina, L.Ac., and Oleg Shargordoskiy for EBTs, a review of the record indicates that defendant preserved its “billing practices” defense by checking box 18 on the NF-10 denial of claim form to assert that plaintiff’s “fees not in accordance with the fee schedule.”
Checked off Box #18 allows the granting of the EBT
Related Articles
- EUO scheduling letters must be sent within proper timeframes for Long Island and NYC providers
- Appellate Term analysis on EUO validity and timing requirements
- Second Department’s interpretation of EUO no-show defense requirements
- Discovery sanctions under CPLR 3212(f) in no-fault cases
- New York No-Fault Insurance Law
Legal Update (February 2026): Since this 2013 decision, Insurance Department Regulations § 65-3.6 governing EUO procedures and timing requirements may have been amended, and the specific timeframes for follow-up EUO requests and denial letters discussed in this case should be verified against current regulatory provisions. Practitioners should confirm the current status of the 10-day follow-up rule and 30-day payment/denial requirements under the most recent version of § 65-3.6.
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.
297 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
EUO No-Show: Attorney Affirmation Sufficient Despite Time Lapse Between No-Shows and Execution
Appellate Term reverses Civil Court, holding that an attorney's affirmation attesting to plaintiff's failure to appear at EUOs was sufficient despite.
Feb 25, 2026
Unitrin citing in the Second Department
Second Department court cites Unitrin precedent in no-fault insurance case, reinforcing that willfulness is not required to prove failure to cooperate in EUO matters.
Oct 6, 2015
The policy of insurance does not need to be included in the motion papers
Court rules insurance companies don't need to produce policy documents to establish EUO provisions when accident occurred after 2002 mandatory endorsement.
Dec 8, 2013
EUO Scheduling Letters Must Be Sent Within the Same Time Frame That Exists for Verifying Bills: A Comprehensive Guide for Long Island and NYC Providers
Master EUO scheduling timing requirements for Long Island and NYC providers. Avoid costly billing delays with expert legal guidance.
Mar 18, 2010
Charley Deng Called the Wrong Number: How a Botched EUO Reschedule Call Sank a No-Fault Claim
Charles Deng Acupuncture v State Farm: calling the wrong investigator at the wrong number to reschedule an EUO raised no triable issue of fact in this no-fault suit.
Dec 26, 2017Was 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.
