Why Trust This Analysis
This article is part of our ongoing business records coverage, with 145 published articles analyzing business records 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.
In no-fault insurance litigation, understanding what evidence requires authentication as a business record can make the difference between winning and losing a case. The business records exception under CPLR 4518 is frequently misunderstood by practitioners who assume all insurance company documents must meet these strict authentication requirements.
A recent decision from the Appellate Term clarifies an important distinction: not every document an insurance company submits needs to be authenticated as a business record. The court’s analysis helps practitioners understand when business records authentication applies and when it doesn’t.
Jason Tenenbaum’s Analysis:
Jesa Med. Supply, Inc. v NYC Tr. Auth., 2013 NY Slip Op 52007(U)(App. Ter 2d Dept. 2013)
“Contrary to plaintiff’s argument, defendant was not required to establish that its denial of claim forms constituted evidence in admissible form pursuant to the business records exception to the rule against hearsay as set forth in CPLR 4518. Defendant did not submit the denials as memoranda “of any act, transaction, occurrence, or event” recorded therein (CPLR 4518 ; see Five Boro Psychological Servs., P.C. v Progressive Northeastern Ins. Co., 27 Misc 3d 141, 2010 NY Slip Op 50991 ; Quality Health Prods., Inc. v NY Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 27 Misc 3d 141, 2010 NY Slip Op 50990 ).”
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.
Key Takeaway
The court distinguished between documents submitted as evidence of recorded business activities versus those submitted for their legal effect. Denial forms don’t require business record authentication because they’re not offered to prove what happened during the underlying transaction, but rather to establish the insurance company’s position. This distinction is crucial for practitioners dealing with CPLR 4518 challenges in no-fault cases.
Legal Update (February 2026): Since this 2013 post, CPLR 4518 business records authentication requirements and related procedural rules may have been modified through court rule amendments or legislative changes. Additionally, appellate decisions interpreting the scope of business records authentication in no-fault cases have continued to evolve, potentially affecting when insurance company documents require formal authentication. Practitioners should verify current CPLR 4518 provisions and recent case law interpretations before relying on the authentication standards discussed in this analysis.
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
Business Records & Documentary Evidence in New York
The business records exception to the hearsay rule is one of the most important evidentiary foundations in New York litigation. Establishing that a document qualifies as a business record under CPLR 4518 requires showing it was made in the regular course of business, at or near the time of the event, and that it was the regular practice to create such records. In no-fault and personal injury cases, disputes over business records arise constantly — from claim files and medical records to billing documents and mailing logs.
145 published articles in Business records
Keep Reading
More Business records Analysis
CPLR § 2106 Amendment Eliminates Affidavit Notarization Requirement: What This Means for New York Litigation
New York's CPLR 2106 permits affirmations in place of many sworn documents. See the 2024 and 2025 changes, exceptions, and historical case notes.
Feb 18, 2026
4518(a)
Analysis of double hearsay issues in motor vehicle accident cases, examining inadmissible police reports and the business records exception under New York evidence law.
Sep 25, 2020
CPLR § 4518 Business Records: The New York Practitioner's Guide
CPLR 4518 business records in New York: foundation, incorporation, police-report hearsay, electronic exhibits and linked case histories.
Feb 21, 2011
Understanding Medical Necessity Defense Failures in New York No-Fault Insurance Cases
Learn how medical necessity defenses fail in NY no-fault cases. Expert analysis of Progressive Med v Allstate reveals key evidentiary pitfalls & hearsay issues.
Feb 18, 2010
Familiarity with predecessor business record practice
Court ruling demonstrates strict requirements for establishing familiarity with predecessor business records under CPLR 4518 hearsay exception in foreclosure cases.
Feb 21, 2018
The absence of an expert is fatal to prove causation
New York court ruling: Plaintiff failed to prove causation in motor vehicle accident case without expert medical testimony establishing causal connection.
Jun 13, 2014Was 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 business records 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.
