Key Takeaway
Court rules first class mail is sufficient for EUO notices even when certified mail tracking shows non-delivery, expanding mailing requirement precedent.
When insurance companies schedule Examinations Under Oath (EUOs), proper notice to claimants is crucial for the validity of these proceedings. A common dispute arises when insurers send EUO scheduling letters through multiple methods — both first class mail and certified mail — but the certified mail tracking indicates non-delivery. This scenario raises important questions about what constitutes adequate notice under New York law.
The interplay between different mailing methods and their legal sufficiency has been a recurring theme in no-fault insurance litigation. While certified mail provides tracking and delivery confirmation, first class mail remains a fundamental method of legal notice. Understanding how courts evaluate these competing forms of evidence is essential for both insurers and healthcare providers navigating the EUO process.
Jason Tenenbaum’s Analysis:
MML Med. Care, P.C. v Praetorian Ins. Co., 2014 NY Slip Op 51792(U)(App. Term 2d Dept. 2014)
“While the Civil Court held that the tracking numbers associated with the copies of the letters which had been sent by certified mail, return receipt requested, reflected that these copies of the EUO scheduling letters had apparently not been delivered to the assignor, such a fact, even if true, would not excuse the failure of plaintiff’s assignor to appear for the duly scheduled EUOs since the record does not contain any evidence showing that the mailing of the EUO scheduling letters to plaintiff’s assignor by first class mail had been insufficient.”
This case goes one step further beyond the argument that mailing the document via certified mail requires proof that the Claimant received the correspondence, despite the fact that there is proof that the mailing was done through first class mail. Rather, this case now says that proof of first class mailing is sufficient, even in the face of affirmative proof that certified mailing was mailed.
Key Takeaway
This decision establishes that first class mail alone can satisfy legal notice requirements for EUO scheduling, even when certified mail tracking shows non-delivery. The court prioritizes proof of proper first class mailing over certified mail delivery confirmation, significantly strengthening insurers’ ability to enforce EUO requirements. This ruling represents an important shift in how courts evaluate mailing sufficiency in no-fault insurance disputes.
