Another Geffner sighting
Court decision requiring medical experts to demonstrate proper qualifications when testifying outside their specialty area in NY personal injury cases.
Another Geffner sighting — Read More →27 articles published in December 2014
The articles below were published in December 2014 by Attorney Jason Tenenbaum and the legal team at his Long Island law office. Each article provides detailed analysis of real court decisions, statutory developments, and procedural issues in New York personal injury, no-fault insurance, and employment law.
Attorney Tenenbaum has maintained this legal blog since 2008, creating one of the most comprehensive public archives of New York insurance and personal injury case law analysis available online. Every article draws on his firsthand experience litigating cases in Nassau County District Court, Suffolk County courts, New York City Civil Court, and the Appellate Term. Unlike generic legal content, these articles cite specific case holdings, analyze judicial reasoning, and identify practical takeaways for attorneys and claimants navigating New York's complex legal landscape.
Whether you are an attorney researching a procedural question, an insurance professional evaluating a claim, or an individual trying to understand your legal rights after an accident or workplace dispute, this archive offers substantive legal analysis grounded in real New York courtroom experience. For case-specific legal advice, contact the Law Office of Jason Tenenbaum at (516) 750-0595 for a free consultation.
Court decision requiring medical experts to demonstrate proper qualifications when testifying outside their specialty area in NY personal injury cases.
Another Geffner sighting — Read More →Court case analysis on CPLR 317 defense for defendants who didn't receive proper notice of summons, exploring alternatives to CPLR 5015 for vacating defaults.
It is not 5015 but 317 — Read More →Court accepts law office failure as valid excuse for missing conference when defendants provide detailed, credible explanation for miscommunication between attorneys.
Valid excuse for law Office Failure — Read More →Appellate Term reverses Civil Court ruling on IME scheduling letters, finding that 48-hour cancellation notice requirement complies with No-Fault Regulations.
IME no-show substantiated again — Read More →NY court rules staged accident schemes void coverage regardless of innocent third party status - challenges Langan doctrine on intentional acts
From the eyes of the insured has its limits — Read More →New York Court of Appeals case demonstrates how timing gaps between accidents and medical complaints can break the causal chain in personal injury claims.
A good causation case — Read More →First Department upholds declaratory judgment victory for insurer after assignors failed to appear at scheduled examinations under oath in no-fault case.
First Department upholds EUO DJ victory — Read More →Court wrestles with Quality vs Amex theories for proving IME no-shows, highlighting ongoing legal tensions in New York no-fault insurance cases.
Quality or Amex? — Read More →Court ruling demonstrates how insurance companies must meet strict procedural requirements when denying no-fault claims based on missed EUOs and IMEs under established legal standards.
No-show failed the Alrof test — Read More →New York court rules on assignment of benefits standing requirements in no-fault insurance case, discussing "on file" statements and claim form requirements.
Unpreserved and without merit — Read More →Court rules discovery preclusion orders are worthless when insurance denials admit receipt of medical bills, allowing no-fault providers to prove their case at trial.
A worthless preclusion order — Read More →A New York court ruling demonstrates how an incorrect zip code on IME scheduling letters can defeat an insurance company's proof of mailing in no-fault cases.
Incorrect zipcode is fatal to mailing of the letters — Read More →Court ruling shows that EUO objections may be waived if providers fail to respond to scheduling letters, even when objecting to the letters' adequacy or content.
EUO objections *may* be futile — Read More →Court rules first class mail is sufficient for EUO notices even when certified mail tracking shows non-delivery, expanding mailing requirement precedent.
First class mail is sufficient even when certified mailing is returned — Read More →MVAIC coverage requirements vary by judicial department, creating strategic considerations for no-fault insurance claims involving burden of proof standards.
MVAIC trouble — Read More →Court ruling establishes "objective medical explanation" requirement for no-fault insurance medical necessity defenses and highlights proper mailing procedure standards.
Mailing and the first time “objective” has landed in a medical rational case — Read More →Analysis of Medcare Supply v Farmers decision on no-fault insurance mailing requirements and affidavit standards for proving receipt and non-receipt of claims.
On receipt and mailing — Read More →CPLR 3216 case analysis: Restoration Sports & Spine v Geico on dismissal requirements for no-fault insurance claims and justifiable excuse standards.
CPLR 3216 again — Read More →Second Department ruling on timely NF-10 denial forms with errors - when nonprejudicial mistakes don't invalidate proper no-fault insurance denials.
A timely denial with errors — Read More →Remembering Norman Dachs, pioneer personal injury attorney and respected no-fault insurance master arbitrator who challenged legal boundaries and elevated practice standards.
A true insurance attorney has passed — Read More →Court ruling demonstrates how contemporaneous medical records can establish causation between accidents and injuries, with implications for no-fault insurance claims.
Contemporaneous medical records sufficient — Read More →Court establishes triable issue of fact on causation in personal injury case, highlighting importance of medical expert testimony and comparative MRI evidence.
Triable issue of causation established — Read More →New York appellate court decisions show inconsistent rulings on no-fault insurance medical necessity and causation claims, highlighting unpredictable outcomes.
It did not work the second time around — Read More →New York court ruling on expert witness qualification requirements - what must be included in expert affidavits and CVs to establish admissibility in personal injury cases.
Failed to adduce that (s)he was an expert — Read More →New York court ruling on causation breaks when injury treatment is delayed 6 months after motor vehicle accident, making medical opinions speculative.
Break in the chain of causation — Read More →Grace v NYC Transit case demonstrates how failing to object to jury instructions and verdict sheets results in waiver, requiring fundamental error for appellate review.
Waiver through silence — Read More →Court ruling allows plaintiff to amend caption to correct corporate name misnomer, establishing no prejudice standard for such procedural corrections.
Amendment of caption is allowable — Read More →The Law Office of Jason Tenenbaum publishes legal analysis on a regular basis covering developments in New York personal injury litigation, no-fault insurance disputes, employment discrimination, and related practice areas. Attorney Tenenbaum started writing about New York case law in 2008, and the blog has grown into a library of over 2,353 articles analyzing court decisions from the Appellate Term, Appellate Division, and Court of Appeals.
Topics frequently covered include the prima facie case standard in no-fault actions, the 30-day preclusion rule under Insurance Regulation 192, IME and EUO no-show defenses, summary judgment practice under CPLR 3212, default judgment standards, verification and claims submission procedures, and the serious injury threshold under Insurance Law Section 5102(d). Employment law articles address wrongful termination, workplace discrimination under the New York State Human Rights Law, wage and hour violations, and employer retaliation claims.
Each article is written for a professional audience but remains accessible to non-lawyers seeking to understand how New York courts handle specific legal issues. The firm serves clients across Long Island, including Nassau County, Suffolk County, and the five boroughs of New York City. If you have a legal question about any topic covered in these articles, call (516) 750-0595 for a free, confidential consultation.
New York's civil court system is one of the most complex in the nation, with multiple overlapping jurisdictions that affect how personal injury, no-fault insurance, and employment cases are litigated. The New York City Civil Court handles claims up to $25,000 in the five boroughs, while the District Courts in Nassau and Suffolk Counties handle similar matters on Long Island. For claims exceeding $25,000, the Supreme Court serves as the primary trial court with unlimited monetary jurisdiction. Despite its name, the Supreme Court is not the highest court in New York — that distinction belongs to the Court of Appeals, which sits in Albany and decides approximately 200 cases per year.
Appeals from Civil Court and District Court decisions go to the Appellate Term, which is divided into departments corresponding to the Appellate Division. The Appellate Term for the Second Department — which covers Nassau County, Suffolk County, Kings County (Brooklyn), Queens County, and Richmond County (Staten Island) — hears hundreds of no-fault insurance appeals each year and has developed a substantial body of case law on topics including timely denial, verification procedures, proof of mailing, fee schedule disputes, and medical necessity standards. The Appellate Division, Second Department, hears appeals from Supreme Court and from the Appellate Term, and its decisions are binding on all lower courts within its jurisdiction.
Understanding where your case falls within this system is critical. A no-fault insurance dispute involving a $3,000 medical bill will follow a very different procedural path than a $500,000 personal injury claim arising from the same automobile accident. The former is typically resolved through mandatory arbitration before the American Arbitration Association under Insurance Department Regulation 68, while the latter proceeds through Supreme Court with full discovery, independent medical examinations under CPLR 3121, depositions, and potentially a jury trial. Attorney Tenenbaum has practiced extensively in all of these venues and understands the strategic considerations unique to each.
Several statutes and regulations appear frequently in the articles archived on this page. Insurance Law Article 51 establishes New York's no-fault insurance framework, requiring every motor vehicle policy to include personal injury protection benefits covering medical expenses, lost earnings (up to $2,000 per month), and other basic economic loss up to $50,000 per person. 11 NYCRR 65-3.8 (Insurance Regulation 192) imposes a 30-day deadline on insurers to pay or deny no-fault claims after receiving proof of claim and all demanded verification, and the failure to timely deny results in preclusion of most coverage defenses.
In personal injury litigation, Insurance Law Section 5102(d) defines the categories of "serious injury" that a plaintiff must establish before recovering non-economic damages in a motor vehicle accident case. The nine categories — death, dismemberment, significant disfigurement, fracture, loss of a fetus, permanent loss of use, permanent consequential limitation, significant limitation of use, and the 90/180-day category — each have specific evidentiary requirements that have been refined through decades of appellate decisions. The Law Office of Jason Tenenbaum has litigated serious injury threshold motions in hundreds of cases and regularly writes about new developments in this area.
Employment claims in New York implicate both state and federal statutes. The New York State Human Rights Law (Executive Law Section 296) prohibits employment discrimination based on age, race, creed, color, national origin, sexual orientation, gender identity, military status, sex, disability, predisposing genetic characteristics, familial status, marital status, and domestic violence victim status. The New York City Human Rights Law provides even broader protections and applies a more liberal standard. At the federal level, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act provide additional protections but are subject to administrative exhaustion requirements through the EEOC.
Workers' compensation cases in New York are governed by the Workers' Compensation Law and administered by the Workers' Compensation Board. Injured workers are entitled to medical treatment, lost wage benefits (typically two-thirds of the average weekly wage, subject to a statutory maximum), and permanency awards for lasting disabilities. Third-party claims — such as personal injury lawsuits against property owners or general contractors under Labor Law Sections 200, 240, and 241 — often run parallel to workers' compensation proceedings and involve complex lien and subrogation issues that require experienced legal counsel to navigate properly.
The articles in this archive analyze real decisions from courts across New York State, with a particular focus on the Appellate Term and Appellate Division decisions that establish binding precedent for trial courts on Long Island and in New York City. Whether you are an attorney preparing a motion, an insurance professional evaluating a claim, or an individual trying to understand your rights, these articles provide the detailed legal analysis that generic legal websites simply cannot offer. For personalized advice about your specific situation, contact the Law Office of Jason Tenenbaum at (516) 750-0595.
The Law Office of Jason Tenenbaum, P.C. serves clients from its office at 326 Walt Whitman Road, Suite C, Huntington Station, New York 11746. The firm represents individuals and businesses throughout Long Island — including the towns of Babylon, Islip, Brookhaven, Smithtown, Riverhead, Southampton, East Hampton, Huntington, and Oyster Bay in Suffolk County, and the cities and villages of Hempstead, Garden City, Mineola, Great Neck, Manhasset, Freeport, Long Beach, Rockville Centre, Valley Stream, Westbury, Hicksville, Massapequa, and Levittown in Nassau County. The firm also handles cases in all five boroughs of New York City: Queens, Brooklyn (Kings County), Manhattan (New York County), the Bronx, and Staten Island (Richmond County). Court appearances are regularly made at Nassau County Supreme Court in Mineola, Suffolk County Supreme Court in Riverhead, the Nassau County District Court, the Suffolk County District Court, and the New York City Civil Court throughout the five boroughs.
Injured? Don't Wait.
Get Your Free Case Evaluation Today
No fees unless we win — available 24/7 for emergencies.