Charley Deng called the wrong number

New York no-fault insurance disputes often hinge on seemingly minor procedural details that can make or break a case. Examinations Under Oath (EUOs) represent a critical juncture where healthcare providers must navigate strict compliance requirements. When insurers schedule these examinations, they typically provide specific contact information and procedures for any scheduling issues.

The recent Appellate Term decision in Charles Deng Acupuncture demonstrates how failing to follow these exact instructions can torpedo an otherwise valid claim. This case serves as a stark reminder that in New York No-Fault Insurance Law, precision matters more than good faith efforts when dealing with EUO scheduling requirements.

Jason Tenenbaum’s Analysis:

Charles Deng Acupuncture, P.C. v State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 2017 NY Slip Op 51764(U)(App. Term 2d Dept. 2017)

“While plaintiff’s owner asserts that, upon receiving the EUO scheduling letters, he called defendant’s investigator and left a message asking to reschedule the EUOs, plaintiff nevertheless failed to raise a triable issue of fact, since the person plaintiff’s owner allegedly called was not the investigator identified in defendant’s EUO scheduling letter as the person to be called in case of any issue, and the phone number allegedly called was not the same as the phone number set forth in defendant’s EUO scheduling letter.”

Had the affidavit listed the person who should have been called, then a triable issue of fact would have been established?

Key Takeaway

Courts strictly enforce EUO scheduling procedures in no-fault cases. Even genuine attempts to reschedule mean nothing if providers contact the wrong person or use incorrect phone numbers. This decision reinforces that EUO compliance issues require absolute adherence to the insurer’s written instructions, leaving no room for reasonable mistakes or good faith efforts.