Key Takeaway
NY appeals court rejects EUO firm's affirmations lacking personal knowledge in three no-fault insurance cases, highlighting procedural deficiencies in summary judgment motions.
IMA Acupuncture, P.C. v Allstate Ins. Co., 2016 NY Slip Op 50926(U)(App. Term 2d Dept. 2016)
Contrary to defendant’s contention, the affirmation submitted in support of defendant’s cross motion by a partner in the law firm retained by defendant to conduct EUOs of plaintiff was not made on personal knowledge and, therefore, defendant failed to establish, as a matter of law, its entitlement to summary judgment dismissing the complaint
Alleviation Med. Servs., P.C. v Hertz Co., 2016 NY Slip Op 50909(U)(App. Term 2d Dept. 2016)
Contrary to defendant’s contention, the affirmation by a partner in the law firm retained by defendant to conduct examinations under oath (EUOs) of plaintiff failed to establish, as a matter of law, defendant’s entitlement to summary judgment dismissing the complaint, as defendant’s cross-moving papers did not contain proof by someone with personal knowledge of the nonappearance of plaintiff for the EUOs in question
New Beginnings Chiropractic, P.C. v Allstate Ins. Co., 2016 NY Slip Op 50916(U)(App. Term 2d Dept. 2016)
“Contrary to defendant’s contention, the initial affirmation submitted in support of defendant’s cross motion by a partner in the law firm retained by defendant to conduct examinations under oath (EUOs) of plaintiff’s assignor was not made on personal knowledge and, therefore, defendant failed to establish, as a matter of law, its entitlement to summary judgment dismissing the complaint”
Maybe instead of speaking at NICB seminars (I have been at a few) and broadcasting their prowess at stopping fee splitting and self referrals (see New Way v. Allstate), this firm should have a better organizational process in mailing EUO letters and recording no-shows. I have trouble fathoming why any insurance company would want to give business to this entity when they cannot substantiate their work product. I have to imagine Civil Court judges and arbitrators must say “this firm”, oh they cannot prove the no show. That is what I think, and seeing who is representing some of these carriers nowadays (these are 2013 decisions that are being reversed), clients see things the same way as me.