Key Takeaway
Staten Island Chiropractic case reveals successful EUO investigation uncovering fee splitting violations and cooperation failures in New York no-fault insurance claims.
This article is part of our ongoing euo issues coverage, with 197 published articles analyzing euo 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.
Staten Island Chiropractic v. American Tr. Ins. Co.
It is story time here on the blog.
I dedicate this post to the work of my former teammates at American Transit Insurance Company. It was a little more than a year ago that our team, which included James F. Sullivan, Esq., a gentleman named Yoda, a claims manager who was the Jedi Leader, a nameless team captain and myself had one of our monthly meetings in Brooklyn. At this meeting, we observed some strange billing from Staten Island Chiropractic. A decision was made to bring Staten Island Chiro for an EUO to find out what was happening. There definitely was good cause to have this EUO.
Health care counsel joined the fray and an EUO involving Mr. Sullivan, another nameless attorney and myself (in the background) materialized. The chiropractor knew he was in hot water with potential fee splitting (details that will not be put on here – you can email me if interested) and he refused to answer legitimate questions that Jim put forward. What I have since called “Park” warnings (Park v. Long Island Insurance Co. ) were issued and the chiropractor still refused to answer questions. Denials were subsequently issued based upon fee splitting and the failure to cooperate with our EUO. I still recall putting together the denial language. This whole process was surreal for so many reasons.
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.
To my surprise, collection counsel put this into arbitration and Mr. Sullivan’s transcript spoke for itself. The denial was upheld by one of the more astute arbitrators AAA has hired in the last few years, Paul Israelson, Esq., and now the whole world can take a peek at what our brainstorming on a cold wintery day in Brooklyn at a monthly meeting engendered.
Related Articles
- Understanding EUO Requirements in New York No-Fault Insurance Cases
- When EUO counsel is not an attorney
- EUO No-Show Consequences: What Happens When You Skip Your Examination Under Oath in New York
- Understanding EUO Denial: When Insurance Companies Can Substantiate Coverage Denials
- New York No-Fault Insurance Law
Legal Update (February 2026): Since this 2014 post, New York’s no-fault regulations governing examination under oath (EUO) procedures and provider cooperation requirements may have been amended. Additionally, fee schedule provisions and arbitration procedures for disputed claims could have been updated through regulatory changes or new case law developments. Practitioners should verify current EUO procedural requirements and cooperation standards under the applicable regulations.
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.
Keep Reading
More EUO issues Analysis
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
EUO no-show – correct statement of law
Court ruling clarifies that insurers cannot enforce EUO requests sent more than 30 days after receiving claims, making late requests nullities under New York no-fault law.
May 22, 2021
EUO no-show (case #2)
Court ruling on EUO no-show defense requirements in NY no-fault cases, emphasizing timely scheduling letters and proper affidavits to toll claim periods.
Jul 30, 2010
Timeliness of the EUO relative to the billings (again)
Recent New York appellate cases reinforce that insurance companies must schedule EUOs within 30 days of receiving no-fault claims to preserve their right to examination.
Dec 26, 2017
EUO no show defense substantiated
Court ruling confirms insurers don't need objective reasons for EUO demands when proving prima facie case for no-show defense in New York no-fault claims.
Nov 28, 2015
Alrof citing again – never a good thing
Court cites problematic Alrof precedent again for EUO no-shows, highlighting ongoing issues with personal knowledge requirements in no-fault insurance cases.
Apr 19, 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 euo 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.
