Why Trust This Analysis
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.
Understanding No-Fault Insurance EUO Timing Requirements
In New York’s no-fault insurance system, insurance companies often request Examinations Under Oath (EUOs) to verify claims. However, these requests must comply with strict regulatory deadlines. The Appellate Term’s decision in O & M Med., P.C. v Travelers Indem. Co. provides crucial guidance on these timing requirements, establishing that insurers cannot simply schedule EUOs whenever convenient.
The case involves a medical provider’s claim that was denied after the insurer scheduled an EUO nearly three months after receiving the claim. This significant delay raised important questions about whether insurance companies can extend the regulatory timeframes at will. The court’s analysis reinforces that EUO procedures must follow specific protocols, and timing violations can invalidate an insurer’s denial.
Jason Tenenbaum’s Analysis:
O & M Med., P.C. v Travelers Indem. Co., 2015 NY Slip Op 50476(U)(App. Term 2d Dept. 2015)
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.
“Pursuant to the No-Fault Regulations, “any additional verification required by the insurer to establish proof of claim shall be requested within 15 business days of receipt of the ” (11 NYCRR 65-3.5 ). This rule applies to requests for EUOs (see e.g. Longevity Medical Supply, Inc. v IDS Property & Cas. Ins. Co., 44 Misc 3d 137, 2014 NY Slip Op 51244 ). Here, there was no duly scheduled EUO at which plaintiff failed to appear, since defendant mailed its first EUO scheduling letter nearly three months after having received the claim at issue, rendering the letter a nullity. Consequently, defendant failed to demonstrate that it had properly denied the claim based upon plaintiff’s failure to comply with a condition precedent to coverage”
Key Takeaway
Insurance companies must request EUOs within 15 business days of receiving a no-fault claim. When insurers fail to meet this deadline, their EUO scheduling letters become nullities, and they cannot deny claims based on non-appearance at improperly scheduled examinations. This ruling protects healthcare providers and injured parties from delayed insurance company tactics.
Legal Update (February 2026): Since this 2015 post, the No-Fault Regulations under 11 NYCRR 65-3 may have been amended, particularly regarding EUO timing requirements and verification procedures under section 65-3.5. Practitioners should verify current regulatory provisions and recent appellate decisions interpreting EUO deadlines, as procedural requirements and timing standards may have evolved.
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
Additional verification not produced is probative of nothing
Compas v Praetorian separated outstanding document verification from missed IMEs and EUOs. Read the claim-by-claim proof and Jason’s original case note.
Oct 6, 2015
So what did the Second Department mean?
Second Department's Interboro v Clennon decision analysis on no-fault EUO compliance and material breach standards for Long Island personal injury attorneys.
Jan 9, 2014
EUO Admissibility and CPLR 3212(f): Critical Evidence Rules for New York No-Fault Practice
Master EUO transcript admissibility and CPLR 3212(f) applications in NY no-fault practice.
Jan 14, 2010
When EUO counsel is not an attorney
New York court ruling on EUO counsel's attorney-client privilege when serving dual investigator roles in insurance cases - key precedent for discovery disputes.
Oct 10, 2017Was 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.
