Key Takeaway
A no-fault insurance case where inadequate affidavits led to defeat, highlighting the importance of learning from legal mistakes and improving documentation strategies.
Learning from Legal Setbacks in No-Fault Insurance Cases
In the complex world of New York No-Fault Insurance Law, even experienced attorneys can inherit problematic cases from previous counsel. The case of Daily Med. Equip. Distrib. Ctr., Inc. v Auto One Ins. Co. serves as a valuable lesson about the importance of comprehensive affidavits and the critical difference between learning from mistakes versus repeating them indefinitely.
This case involved deficient verification affidavits that failed to address Additional Verification requests - a common but often overlooked requirement in no-fault practice. While the outcome was unfavorable, it demonstrates how legal setbacks can become learning opportunities when attorneys take proactive steps to improve their practice rather than simply accepting repeated defeats.
Jason Tenenbaum’s Analysis:
Daily Med. Equip. Distrib. Ctr., Inc. v Auto One Ins. Co., 2016 NY Slip Op 51443(U)(App. Term 2d Dept. 2016)
These were affidavits I inherited from prior counsel. They explained NF-10s but did not mention Additional Verification requests. There was a residual catch all, but this did not work. But I mention this loss because after seeing it a few years ago, the affidavits were instantly fixed. This should be contrasted to all of the Alrof v. Safeco sightings we see where the court has already shot down certain affidavits and nobody attempts to fix, alter or ameliorate them. When people learn from their errors, they should be commended. Those that constantly repeat their mistakes are doomed to a life of mediocrity.
Key Takeaway
The most valuable aspect of this case wasn’t the loss itself, but the immediate corrective action taken afterward. By recognizing the deficiency in additional verification documentation and promptly revising their affidavit templates, the attorney transformed a setback into a practice improvement. This proactive approach stands in stark contrast to practitioners who repeatedly use rejected affidavit forms without making necessary adjustments.
