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.
No-fault insurance cases hinge on strict procedural compliance, and even minor timing errors can have significant consequences for insurance carriers. Examinations Under Oath (EUOs) are a critical tool that insurers use to investigate potentially fraudulent claims, but the scheduling and conduct of these examinations must follow precise regulatory requirements under New York law.
The case of Acupuncture Healthcare Plaza I, P.C. v Allstate Ins. Co. demonstrates how seemingly small administrative mistakes can undermine an insurer’s entire defense strategy. While Allstate correctly handled the initial EUO scheduling, their failure to properly time the follow-up scheduling letter created a domino effect that rendered their ultimate claim denial untimely. This type of procedural error is particularly concerning for law firms that specialize in EUO defense work and bill clients on an hourly basis.
The regulatory framework governing EUOs is unforgiving, and courts have consistently held insurers to strict compliance standards. When carriers fail to follow proper procedures, they risk losing their right to deny claims entirely, regardless of the underlying merits.
Jason Tenenbaum’s Analysis:
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.
Acupuncture Healthcare Plaza I, P.C. v Allstate Ins. Co., 2017 NY Slip Op 50939(U)(App. Term 2d Dept. 2017)
“In the papers submitted in support of its motion, defendant admitted receiving plaintiff’s claim form. In an affirmation, defendant’s counsel established that an initial EUO scheduling letter had been timely mailed to plaintiff’s assignor (see St. Vincent’s Hosp. of Richmond v Government Empls. Ins. Co., 50 AD3d 1123 ; 11 NYCRR 65-3.5 ), but further demonstrated that the follow-up EUO scheduling letter had not been timely mailed (see 11 NYCRR 65-3.6 ). Contrary to defendant’s contention, 11 NYCRR 65-3.8 specifically states that it does not apply to follow-up requests for verification. As a result, because defendant’s follow-up EUO scheduling letter was untimely, the NF-10 denial of claim form which defendant eventually sent was untimely. ”
When you are an “EUO firm” and you bill hourly, these are mistakes that make people cringe.
Key Takeaway
This case underscores the critical importance of strict adherence to New York no-fault insurance procedural requirements. Insurance carriers and their counsel must maintain rigorous deadline tracking systems for EUO scheduling, as even follow-up letters are subject to specific timing requirements that can invalidate subsequent claim denials if missed.
Legal Update (February 2026): Since this post’s publication in 2017, New York’s no-fault insurance regulations under 11 NYCRR Part 65 have undergone several amendments, including potential revisions to EUO procedural requirements and timing provisions. The specific regulatory sections cited (65-3.5, 65-3.6, and 65-3.8) may have been modified through subsequent regulatory updates. Practitioners handling EUO matters should verify current provisions in 11 NYCRR 65-3 to ensure compliance with any updated procedural requirements and timing standards.
Related Articles
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
EUO no show – what’s the reason?
Learn why EUO no-shows occur when insurers fail to provide required justification. Court rules insurers must give specific objective reasons for EUO requests.
Jun 11, 2016
No-show failed the Alrof test
Great Health Care v Hertz: neither side earned summary judgment. The IME mailing proof and EUO nonappearance proof failed for different reasons.
Dec 23, 2014
Roggio/Westchester-Lincoln
New York court ruling clarifies medical providers' independent arbitration rights and insurer EUO denial requirements in no-fault insurance cases.
Jul 17, 2012
Understanding Examination Under Oath (EUO) Requirements in New York Personal Injury Cases
Learn about Examination Under Oath (EUO) requirements in NY personal injury cases. Expert legal guidance on EUO procedures. Call 516-750-0595.
May 12, 2019Was 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.
