Key Takeaway
Court ruling on Malella defense and attorney fee calculations in NY no-fault insurance arbitration, including fraudulent incorporation claims and Article 75 proceedings.
Country-Wide Ins. Co. v Valdan Acupuncture, P.C., 2017 NY Slip Op 04068 (1st Dept. 2017)
(1) Assuming without deciding that an insurer’s defense of fraudulent incorporation cannot be precluded (see AVA Acupuncture, P.C. v AutoOne Ins. Co., 28 Misc 3d 134, 2010 NY Slip Op 51350 ; Bath Med. Supply, Inc. v Allstate Indem. Co., 27 Misc 3d 92, 95 ), we conclude that the master arbitrator properly confirmed the award of the arbitrator, who reviewed petitioner’s submissions relating to the plea of guilty to no-fault insurance fraud by a man married to the owner of respondent, found that respondent was not mentioned once in the “hundreds of pages” submitted, and rejected petitioner’s attempt to hold the owner “responsible by association.”
(2) “Respondent is entitled to attorneys’ fees for this appeal (11 NYCRR 65-4.10(j)(4)), calculated, in accordance with 11 NYCRR 65-4.6(b), as 20% of the no-fault benefits awarded.”
This decision goes against Geico v. AAMG, which seems to imply an hourly fee for work in relation to an article 75. This decision does not touch upon a de-novo action, which may or may not be subjection to an attorney fee in accordance with 4.6(b) viz 4.10(j)(4).
Also, precludable Mallela? So much in a small case.
Related Articles
- Attorney Fee Requirements in New York No-Fault Insurance Cases
- Master Arbitrator Review Standards NY – When Decisions Can Be Vacated
- LMK Attorney Fee Calculation Problems in NY No-Fault Cases
- Understanding Article 75 Proceedings: You Cannot Backdoor Master Awards Through Declaratory Judgment
Legal Update (February 2026): The attorney fee provisions cited in this 2017 decision (11 NYCRR 65-4.6 and 65-4.10) have been subject to multiple regulatory amendments since publication, including revisions to fee calculation methodologies and procedural requirements. Given the ongoing evolution of no-fault attorney fee regulations and potential changes to Article 75 practice standards, practitioners should verify current provisions before relying on the fee award calculations discussed in this post.
