Key Takeaway
Trial de novo requires awards of $5,000+ for plenary judicial review in New York no-fault insurance cases, per Insurance Law § 5106(b).
Imperium Ins. Co. v Innovative Chiropractic Servs., P.C, 2014 NY Slip Op 50697(U)(App. Term 1st Dept. 2014)
The plaintiff insurer commenced the underlying actions, consolidated below, seeking declaratory relief and review by way of trial de novo of five separately issued master arbitrator’s awards issued in favor of defendant medical providers on their claims for first-party no-fault benefits. While Civil Court had jurisdiction to entertain the lawsuit (see CCA 212-a; Brooks v Rivera, 40 Misc 3d 133, 2013 NY Slip Op 51191 ), we sustain the dismissal of the consolidated actions on the merits. De novo review of a master arbitrator’s award is limited to the grounds set forth in CPLR article 75 unless the award is in the amount of $5,000 or more, in which case the dispute is subject to a “plenary judicial adjudication” pursuant to Insurance Law § 5106(b) (see Matter of Greenberg , 70 NY2d 573, 576-577 )
Compare this to: Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v Bayside Pain & Rehabilitation Medicine, P.C., 39 Misc.3d 148(A)(App. Term 2d Dept. 2013)(construing DISTRICT COURT act). I am curious why the Legislature gave a broader grant of jurisdiction in the NYCCCA as opposed to the UDCA. As to the $5,000 rule, my only remark is that the Appellate Term has now incentivized the splitting of no-fault billings to avoid eventual de-novo review.
Related Articles
- Supplemental affirmation requirements and res judicata in declaratory judgment cases
- Second Department guidance on declaratory judgment actions
- First Department’s approach to declaratory judgment victories
- Procedural missteps and notice requirements in DJ cases
- Denial of Claims practice area
Legal Update (February 2026): Since this 2014 post, the monetary threshold for trial de novo review under Insurance Law § 5106(b) may have been adjusted, and related procedural requirements for declaratory judgment actions involving master arbitrator awards may have been modified through regulatory amendments or legislative updates. Practitioners should verify current threshold amounts and jurisdictional provisions before proceeding with such actions.
