Why Trust This Analysis
This article is part of our ongoing procedural issues coverage, with 187 published articles analyzing procedural issues 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.
The concept of “account stated” plays a crucial role in debt collection and insurance reimbursement cases. An account stated is a legal theory where parties agree on the balance due on an account, either explicitly or through conduct like making partial payments without dispute. This doctrine has particular relevance in no-fault insurance cases, where medical providers seek payment from insurers for services rendered.
The evidentiary standards for proving an account stated have evolved through New York case law. While earlier precedents suggested that strict admissibility requirements might be relaxed in certain contexts, recent decisions have clarified the foundational requirements needed to establish these claims in court. Understanding these standards is essential for both plaintiffs seeking to recover on accounts and defendants challenging the sufficiency of evidence presented.
Jason Tenenbaum’s Analysis:
Discover Bank v Maler, 2014 NY Slip Op 50144(U)(App. Term 2d Dept. 2014),
A no-fault bill was once analogized to an account stated. In Etienne, we learned that admissible proof was not necessary to prove the account that was stated.
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.
Now, in Discover Bank v Maler, we learn that an account stated requires proof in admissible form:
“The record discloses no evidentiary error warranting reversal. A proper foundation was established for the admission of the billing statements generated by plaintiff, since its witness was sufficiently familiar with plaintiff’s corporate records and its record keeping procedures “to aver that the records what purport to be and that came out of files” (DeLeon v Port Auth. of NY & N.J., 306 AD2d 146, 146 ).”
Key Takeaway
The Discover Bank v Maler decision represents a significant shift in evidentiary standards for account stated claims. Unlike the earlier Etienne precedent, courts now require admissible evidence with proper foundation to establish an account stated. This means witnesses must demonstrate sufficient familiarity with record-keeping procedures to authenticate billing statements and corporate records, creating a higher bar for successful debt collection actions.
Related Articles
- Combating Litigation Delay Tactics in New York No-Fault Insurance Cases
- Single Motion Rule and Statute of Limitations: Long Island & NYC Legal Guide
- Understanding Collateral Estoppel in New York No-Fault Insurance Cases
- Signature Authenticity and Stamped Holographic Requirements in Peer Review
- New York No-Fault Insurance Law
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
Procedural Issues in New York Litigation
New York civil procedure governs every stage of litigation — from pleading requirements and service of process to motion practice, discovery deadlines, and trial procedures. The CPLR creates strict procedural rules that can make or break a case regardless of the underlying merits. These articles examine the procedural pitfalls, timing requirements, and strategic considerations that practitioners face in New York state courts, with a particular focus on no-fault insurance and personal injury practice.
187 published articles in Procedural Issues
Keep Reading
More Procedural Issues Analysis
How to Talk to a Judge in New York: What to Say, What to Avoid, and How to Present Yourself
Address the judge as 'Your Honor,' stand when you speak, wait to be recognized, and keep answers short and honest. A Long Island trial lawyer explains.
Feb 24, 2026
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
An unsigned OSC on appeal – procedure.
Appeals court procedure when a trial court declines to sign a proposed order to show cause, including when leave to appeal is required versus direct appellate review.
Aug 23, 2018
2309(c) – dead for now (maybe?) and the out of state insurer issue
Analysis of CPLR 2309(c) certificate of conformity requirements for out-of-state affidavits in New York no-fault insurance litigation and recent court decisions.
Mar 5, 2014
Procedural Delays in No-Fault Insurance Litigation: Understanding the Prejudice Standard
Learn about procedural delay standards in NY no-fault insurance litigation. Expert analysis of prejudice requirements for Long Island & NYC medical providers.
Feb 17, 2012
An appeal from a judgment after a trial brings up for review a summary judgment motion that was not previously appealed
Understanding CPLR 5501(a)(1): How to challenge adverse summary judgment rulings on appeal from final judgment. Expert analysis of Bandler v Liberty case.
Mar 24, 2010Was 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 procedural issues 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.
