Arizona and ATIC
New York appellate decision highlights critical issues with notice delivery in insurance cancellations and problematic attorney conduct during depositions in ATIC case.
Arizona and ATIC — Read More →31 articles published in December 2017
The articles below were published in December 2017 by Attorney Jason Tenenbaum and the legal team at his Long Island law office. Each article provides detailed analysis of real court decisions, statutory developments, and procedural issues in New York personal injury, no-fault insurance, and employment law.
Attorney Tenenbaum has maintained this legal blog since 2008, creating one of the most comprehensive public archives of New York insurance and personal injury case law analysis available online. Every article draws on his firsthand experience litigating cases in Nassau County District Court, Suffolk County courts, New York City Civil Court, and the Appellate Term. Unlike generic legal content, these articles cite specific case holdings, analyze judicial reasoning, and identify practical takeaways for attorneys and claimants navigating New York's complex legal landscape.
Whether you are an attorney researching a procedural question, an insurance professional evaluating a claim, or an individual trying to understand your legal rights after an accident or workplace dispute, this archive offers substantive legal analysis grounded in real New York courtroom experience. For case-specific legal advice, contact the Law Office of Jason Tenenbaum at (516) 750-0595 for a free consultation.
New York appellate decision highlights critical issues with notice delivery in insurance cancellations and problematic attorney conduct during depositions in ATIC case.
Arizona and ATIC — Read More →New York arbitration law allows waiver of arbitration clauses when fee sharing and venue provisions prevent statutory wage claims from being pursued.
Arbitration is waivable — Read More →Allstate's motion for leave to appeal Alleviation Medical Services case granted by Appellate Division. Analysis of potential outcomes and regulatory implications.
Alleviation is going to the Appellate Division – what happens next is for you to decide. — Read More →Appellate Term grants clarification motion on 9% interest rate in no-fault case despite CPLR 5004 allowing different rates when other statutes apply.
Giant Oops from the Appellate Term — Read More →Fourth Department ruling establishes triable issue of fact regarding vehicle ownership despite conflicting documentation and testimony in no-fault insurance case.
Was the Plaintiff the owner? Court says triable issue of fact. — Read More →Court highlights credibility issues when plaintiff claims femur fracture but walks unassisted post-accident, creating factual disputes in no-fault threshold cases.
Was the femur broken in the accident? — Read More →New York court finds defendant's expert report created fact issues by relying on plaintiff's medical records showing accident-related injuries and limited range of motion.
The cited to report raised an issue of fact — Read More →Queens Village Medical case examines when physical medicine experts can testify about orthopedic peer reviews in NY no-fault insurance disputes and expert witness competency rules.
Out of scope peer: it is okay — Read More →NY court rules insurance company failed to substantiate fee schedule defense by not proving correct conversion factor was used in calculating reimbursement rates.
Fee schedule defense not substantiated — Read More →New York no-fault case shows partial response to verification requests is insufficient - providers must fully comply or risk premature dismissal of benefits claims.
Partial response to verification insufficient — Read More →Court rules that partial responses to verification requests render no-fault insurance claims premature, emphasizing the critical importance of complete compliance with verification requirements.
Non responded to verification fatal to plaintiff’s case — Read More →Court ruling on CPT Code 97039 billing disputes in NY no-fault insurance cases, covering "By Report" documentation requirements and insurer denial defenses.
CPT Code 97039 again — Read More →Court ruling on IME no-show disclaimer timing - denial valid after verification received despite prior grounds for disclaimer existing under NY no-fault law.
IME no show disclaimer substantiated — Read More →Court ruling allows insurance company to use workers' compensation fee schedule defense for acupuncture services, separating specific CPT codes from the broader case.
Fee schedule defense: Court separates 97811, 97813, 97814 from remainder of case — Read More →Court dismisses no-fault case where provider called wrong investigator and phone number for EUO rescheduling, highlighting importance of following exact instructions.
Charley Deng called the wrong number — Read More →New York court ruling on peer review reports in no-fault insurance medical necessity cases. Analysis of evidentiary standards and expert testimony requirements.
The peer review and its entry into evidence? — Read More →Recent New York appellate cases reinforce that insurance companies must schedule EUOs within 30 days of receiving no-fault claims to preserve their right to examination.
Timeliness of the EUO relative to the billings (again) — Read More →Analysis of St. Locher Med. v IDS case on proving EUO no-shows and potential legal strategies for challenging insurance carrier documentation in New York no-fault claims.
Proof of no-show? — Read More →Appellate court reverses denial of EBT motion against radiology provider, emphasizing insurers' right to examine medical professionals in necessity disputes.
EBT granted — Read More →MCMC's use of fake employee "Lynn Carter" for IME scheduling raises questions about no-show personal knowledge requirements in NY no-fault insurance cases.
Lynn Carter — Read More →Court ruling in Laga v GEICO shows insurers must provide precise proof when applying Ground Rule 11 reductions to no-fault medical bills under New York's fee schedule.
Fee schedule defense failed — Read More →Court rejects healthcare provider's appeal of 45-day rule denial, finding their own papers proved claims were submitted late under 11 NYCRR 65-2.4(c).
45-day rule appeal was meritless — Read More →Seven court cases show Allstate's repeated failure to prove timely mailing of claims documents, highlighting a critical issue in no-fault insurance litigation.
Allstate’s inability to prove the timely mailing of claims documents — Read More →Court ruling establishes bad faith and GBL 349 claims against insurers who pressure IME doctors to deny no-fault benefits, allowing consequential damages.
Bad faith and GBL 349 has really arrived — Read More →Court of Appeals reverses Appellate Division ruling on lost wage claims, finding triable issues of fact exist where lower court deemed claims speculative.
Lost wage case reinstated — Read More →Analysis of attorney fee recovery in New York declaratory judgment actions, examining when medical providers and insureds can recover legal costs in no-fault insurance disputes.
Attorneys fees on a DJ — Read More →Court dismisses defamation case against Trump, ruling statements were too vague and subjective to be legally actionable under New York law.
TRUMP! — Read More →Court case highlights attorney malpractice risks in SUM claims when settling without insurer consent, emphasizing professional duty requirements.
Oh somebody had a bad day. — Read More →NY court dismisses no-fault insurance case due to plaintiff's willful discovery violations after repeated court orders and warnings of dismissal.
Dismissed due to discovery violation — Read More →Court limits medical record discovery in slip and fall case to injuries actually claimed, rejecting 20+ years of disability records for unrelated conditions.
Limitations on medical record discovery — Read More →Court allows judicial notice of Supreme Court order in reply brief, finding res judicata bars no-fault provider's claims based on prior declaratory judgment action.
Judicial notice of Supreme Court order in the reply brief — Read More →The Law Office of Jason Tenenbaum publishes legal analysis on a regular basis covering developments in New York personal injury litigation, no-fault insurance disputes, employment discrimination, and related practice areas. Attorney Tenenbaum started writing about New York case law in 2008, and the blog has grown into a library of over 2,353 articles analyzing court decisions from the Appellate Term, Appellate Division, and Court of Appeals.
Topics frequently covered include the prima facie case standard in no-fault actions, the 30-day preclusion rule under Insurance Regulation 192, IME and EUO no-show defenses, summary judgment practice under CPLR 3212, default judgment standards, verification and claims submission procedures, and the serious injury threshold under Insurance Law Section 5102(d). Employment law articles address wrongful termination, workplace discrimination under the New York State Human Rights Law, wage and hour violations, and employer retaliation claims.
Each article is written for a professional audience but remains accessible to non-lawyers seeking to understand how New York courts handle specific legal issues. The firm serves clients across Long Island, including Nassau County, Suffolk County, and the five boroughs of New York City. If you have a legal question about any topic covered in these articles, call (516) 750-0595 for a free, confidential consultation.
New York's civil court system is one of the most complex in the nation, with multiple overlapping jurisdictions that affect how personal injury, no-fault insurance, and employment cases are litigated. The New York City Civil Court handles claims up to $25,000 in the five boroughs, while the District Courts in Nassau and Suffolk Counties handle similar matters on Long Island. For claims exceeding $25,000, the Supreme Court serves as the primary trial court with unlimited monetary jurisdiction. Despite its name, the Supreme Court is not the highest court in New York — that distinction belongs to the Court of Appeals, which sits in Albany and decides approximately 200 cases per year.
Appeals from Civil Court and District Court decisions go to the Appellate Term, which is divided into departments corresponding to the Appellate Division. The Appellate Term for the Second Department — which covers Nassau County, Suffolk County, Kings County (Brooklyn), Queens County, and Richmond County (Staten Island) — hears hundreds of no-fault insurance appeals each year and has developed a substantial body of case law on topics including timely denial, verification procedures, proof of mailing, fee schedule disputes, and medical necessity standards. The Appellate Division, Second Department, hears appeals from Supreme Court and from the Appellate Term, and its decisions are binding on all lower courts within its jurisdiction.
Understanding where your case falls within this system is critical. A no-fault insurance dispute involving a $3,000 medical bill will follow a very different procedural path than a $500,000 personal injury claim arising from the same automobile accident. The former is typically resolved through mandatory arbitration before the American Arbitration Association under Insurance Department Regulation 68, while the latter proceeds through Supreme Court with full discovery, independent medical examinations under CPLR 3121, depositions, and potentially a jury trial. Attorney Tenenbaum has practiced extensively in all of these venues and understands the strategic considerations unique to each.
Several statutes and regulations appear frequently in the articles archived on this page. Insurance Law Article 51 establishes New York's no-fault insurance framework, requiring every motor vehicle policy to include personal injury protection benefits covering medical expenses, lost earnings (up to $2,000 per month), and other basic economic loss up to $50,000 per person. 11 NYCRR 65-3.8 (Insurance Regulation 192) imposes a 30-day deadline on insurers to pay or deny no-fault claims after receiving proof of claim and all demanded verification, and the failure to timely deny results in preclusion of most coverage defenses.
In personal injury litigation, Insurance Law Section 5102(d) defines the categories of "serious injury" that a plaintiff must establish before recovering non-economic damages in a motor vehicle accident case. The nine categories — death, dismemberment, significant disfigurement, fracture, loss of a fetus, permanent loss of use, permanent consequential limitation, significant limitation of use, and the 90/180-day category — each have specific evidentiary requirements that have been refined through decades of appellate decisions. The Law Office of Jason Tenenbaum has litigated serious injury threshold motions in hundreds of cases and regularly writes about new developments in this area.
Employment claims in New York implicate both state and federal statutes. The New York State Human Rights Law (Executive Law Section 296) prohibits employment discrimination based on age, race, creed, color, national origin, sexual orientation, gender identity, military status, sex, disability, predisposing genetic characteristics, familial status, marital status, and domestic violence victim status. The New York City Human Rights Law provides even broader protections and applies a more liberal standard. At the federal level, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act provide additional protections but are subject to administrative exhaustion requirements through the EEOC.
Workers' compensation cases in New York are governed by the Workers' Compensation Law and administered by the Workers' Compensation Board. Injured workers are entitled to medical treatment, lost wage benefits (typically two-thirds of the average weekly wage, subject to a statutory maximum), and permanency awards for lasting disabilities. Third-party claims — such as personal injury lawsuits against property owners or general contractors under Labor Law Sections 200, 240, and 241 — often run parallel to workers' compensation proceedings and involve complex lien and subrogation issues that require experienced legal counsel to navigate properly.
The articles in this archive analyze real decisions from courts across New York State, with a particular focus on the Appellate Term and Appellate Division decisions that establish binding precedent for trial courts on Long Island and in New York City. Whether you are an attorney preparing a motion, an insurance professional evaluating a claim, or an individual trying to understand your rights, these articles provide the detailed legal analysis that generic legal websites simply cannot offer. For personalized advice about your specific situation, contact the Law Office of Jason Tenenbaum at (516) 750-0595.
The Law Office of Jason Tenenbaum, P.C. serves clients from its office at 326 Walt Whitman Road, Suite C, Huntington Station, New York 11746. The firm represents individuals and businesses throughout Long Island — including the towns of Babylon, Islip, Brookhaven, Smithtown, Riverhead, Southampton, East Hampton, Huntington, and Oyster Bay in Suffolk County, and the cities and villages of Hempstead, Garden City, Mineola, Great Neck, Manhasset, Freeport, Long Beach, Rockville Centre, Valley Stream, Westbury, Hicksville, Massapequa, and Levittown in Nassau County. The firm also handles cases in all five boroughs of New York City: Queens, Brooklyn (Kings County), Manhattan (New York County), the Bronx, and Staten Island (Richmond County). Court appearances are regularly made at Nassau County Supreme Court in Mineola, Suffolk County Supreme Court in Riverhead, the Nassau County District Court, the Suffolk County District Court, and the New York City Civil Court throughout the five boroughs.
Injured? Don't Wait.
Get Your Free Case Evaluation Today
No fees unless we win — available 24/7 for emergencies.