Key Takeaway
Court limits on judicial notice in no-fault insurance cases - workers' compensation fee schedule requires proper foundation and notice under CPLR 4511
This article is part of our ongoing fee schedule coverage, with 118 published articles analyzing fee schedule 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.
Acupuncture Healthcare Plaza I, P.C. v Metlife Auto & Home, 2017 NY Slip Op 50207(U)(App. Term 2d Dept. 2017)
I am unsure what was supposed to be accomplished with this appeal. I hope the carrier demands a refund of their legal bill on this case.
“he parties stipulated that plaintiff had established its prima facie case and that defendant had timely denied the claims at issue.”
“After the trial court marked as exhibits documents which included two pages of a workers’ compensation medical fee schedule, the claim forms and the denial of claim forms, the trial began and plaintiff immediately rested. Defendant then stated that it did not have a witness to testify regarding the fee schedule. Defendant asked the court to take judicial notice of the workers’ compensation fee schedule and rested. The Civil Court granted judgment to plaintiff, stating only that defendant had failed to proffer a witness. It is unclear whether the court took judicial notice of the workers’ compensation fee schedule.”
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.
Now we all know this was affirmed, right? Now you do.
“While a court is permitted to take judicial notice of, among other things, the workers’ compensation fee schedule (see CPLR 4511 ; LVOV Acupuncture, P.C. v GEICO Ins. Co., 32 Misc 3d 144, 2011 NY Slip Op 51721 ; see also Kingsbrook Jewish Med. Ctr. v Allstate Ins. Co., 61 AD3d 13, 20 ), the party seeking to have the court take judicial notice should provide the court with sufficient information to comply with the request (see CPLR 4511 ; Megacure Acupuncture, P.C. v Clarendon Natl. Ins. Co., 33 Misc 3d 141, 2011 NY Slip Op 52199 ) and demonstrate that it “has given each adverse party notice of intention to request it” (CPLR 4511 ). Even if the Civil Court had taken judicial notice of the workers’ compensation fee schedule, the fee schedule does not, in and of itself, establish that defendant properly utilized the codes set forth within the workers’ compensation fee schedule to calculate the amount which plaintiff was entitled to recover for each service rendered (see Kingsbrook Jewish Med. Ctr. v Allstate Ins. Co., 61 AD3d 13 ; Rogy Med., P.C. v Mercury Cas. Co., 23 Misc 3d 132, 2009 NY Slip Op 50732 ; cf. Natural Acupuncture Health, P.C. v Praetorian Ins. Co., 30 Misc 3d 132, 2011 NY Slip Op 50040 ). In addition, defendant also proffered no evidence to prove that the claim at issue in the fifth cause of action had been properly reduced by virtue of a $200 deductible.”
The Court cited Natural Acupuncture Health with a “c.f.” A review of the record shows that the carrier presented the affidavit of a claims representative demonstrating why certain codes were paid at a certain amount. With a prima facie stip, all the carrier had to do was either (1) Bring down a claim rep; or (2) Hire an expert coder to explain why the reduction was correct. In scenario two, you would lose the $200 deductible argument, but that was clearly now the crux of this case. Just a silly appeal.
Related Articles
- Fee schedule defense – competent evidence?
- Fee Schedule Defense Requirements in No-Fault Insurance Cases | Long Island & NYC Legal Analysis
- Only in no-fault can a Civil Court JHO “reverse” the holdings of the Appellate Divisions and the Court of Appeals
- Understanding Medical Billing and Down-Coding in New York No-Fault Insurance Claims
- New York No-Fault Insurance Law
Legal Update (February 2026): Since this 2017 post, New York’s no-fault fee schedules and workers’ compensation medical fee schedules referenced for judicial notice purposes may have undergone regulatory amendments and rate adjustments. Additionally, procedural requirements for establishing fee schedule applicability in no-fault cases may have evolved through subsequent appellate decisions. Practitioners should verify current fee schedule provisions and any updates to CPLR 4511 judicial notice standards when litigating reimbursement disputes.
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.
About This Topic
Fee Schedule Issues in No-Fault Insurance
The New York no-fault fee schedule establishes the maximum reimbursement rates for medical treatment provided to injured motorists. Disputes over fee schedule calculations, coding, usual and customary charges, and the applicability of workers compensation fee schedules to no-fault claims are common. These articles analyze fee schedule regulations, court decisions on reimbursement disputes, and the practical challenges providers face in obtaining appropriate payment under the no-fault system.
118 published articles in Fee Schedule
Keep Reading
More Fee Schedule Analysis
Acupuncture Reimbursements and Insurance Legalities Explained
Explore the Forrest Chen v. GEICO case and its impact on acupuncture insurance reimbursements in NY. Key insights for providers and patients.
Dec 11, 2024Simple addition is insufficient
Jodi Jacobs's 2021 mixed appeal: four claims dismissed, one fee balance unresolved, and why the schedule alone did not prove correct code use.
May 22, 20218 units applies to billing medical providers only?
Suffolk County District Court rules on 8-unit billing limit for medical providers under NY no-fault insurance fee schedule, allowing reimbursement despite multiple claims.
Oct 27, 2013Another case where the Appellate Term seems to hold that a triable issue of fact is raised regarding the compensability of range of motion testing
First Aid left a bundling dispute for trial in 2010. The opinion did not identify range-of-motion codes or establish a right to separate payment.
Apr 13, 2010CPM – now it is up to DFS and WCB to address the problem
Appellate Division rules CPM reimbursement must be at general public rental value.
Jul 7, 2018Claims representative’s attestation is sufficient to make a prima facie showing
Court ruling establishes that a claims representative's affidavit explaining fee calculations using relative values and conversion factors creates sufficient prima facie evidence.
Oct 27, 2016Was 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 fee schedule 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.