EUO to nowehere

When Insurance Companies Fail to Build Their Case: The Importance of Complete Documentation

In no-fault insurance litigation, insurance companies often rely on Examinations Under Oath (EUOs) to challenge claims and establish defenses. However, simply conducting an EUO isn’t enough — the content and results of that examination must be properly documented and presented to the court. A recent appellate decision demonstrates how even when an insurance carrier has potentially strong evidence, failing to include crucial documentation can doom their motion for summary judgment.

This case highlights a fundamental principle in New York no-fault insurance law: the burden is on the insurance company to prove their defenses with sufficient evidence. When carriers take shortcuts in their motion practice, they risk losing cases they might otherwise win.

Jason Tenenbaum’s Analysis:

Forest Hills Healthcare Physician, P.C. v Lancer Ins. Co., 2021 NY Slip Op 51170(U)(App. Term 2d Dept. 2021)

“defendant’s moving papers contain a copy of plaintiff’s assignor’s sworn application for no-fault benefits in which plaintiff’s assignor swore that she was passenger in defendant’s insured’s vehicle when the accident occurred. In addition, although defendant’s moving papers contain a statement by defendant’s attorney that plaintiff’s assignor appeared for an examination under oath, *what transpired at the [2]examination under oath is not set forth. As such, contrary to defendant’s contention, defendant’s moving papers do not establish, prima facie, that plaintiff’s assignor was not a passenger in defendant’s insured’s vehicle when the accident occurred ”

An appeal that makes you say why.

Key Takeaway

Insurance companies must present complete evidence when challenging passenger status in no-fault cases. Simply stating that an EUO was conducted without providing the transcript or detailing what occurred during the examination is insufficient to establish a prima facie defense. This procedural misstep can result in losing summary judgment motions even when the underlying evidence might support the insurer’s position. The case underscores the critical importance of thorough documentation in EUO proceedings.