Failure to include order/judgment with declaration is fatal
Active Chiropractic, P.C. v 21st Century Ins. Co., 2018 NY Slip Op 50200(U)(App. Term 2d Dept. 2018) Many times the Court will write motion granted settled order,
Active Chiropractic, P.C. v 21st Century Ins. Co., 2018 NY Slip Op 50200(U)(App. Term 2d Dept. 2018) Many times the Court will write motion granted settled order,
Active Chiropractic, P.C. v Allstate Ins., 2018 NY Slip Op 50201(U)(App. Term 2d Dept. 2018) “Initially, we note that, although defendant’s motion was denominated as one to
Unitrin Advantage Ins. Co. v All of NY, Inc., 2018 NY Slip Op 00810 (1st Dept. 2018) In the approximately 10 years, since Unitrin brought the notion
Hertz Vehs. LLC v Significant Care, PT, P.C., 2018 NY Slip Op 00456 (1st Dept. 2018) The affidavit of the Hertz claims handler personally assigned to this
Country-Wide Ins. Co. v Gotham Med., P.C., 2017 NY Slip Op 07538 (1st Dept. 2017) (1) “The refusal by defendant’s principal, Dr. Alexandre Scheer, to answer questions
Mapfre Ins. Co. of N.Y. v Soltanov, 2017 NY Slip Op 31520(U)(Sup. Ct. NY Co. 2017) We previously discussed that the poor man’s DJ that did not
Fresh Acupuncture, P.C. v Interboro Ins. Co., 2017 NY Slip Op 27214 (App. Term 2d Dept. 2017) The Appellate Term about seven years ago gave us Five
Mapfre Ins. Co. of N. Y. v Manoo, 2016 NY Slip Op 86914(U)(1st Dept. 2016) “Defendant-respondent having moved for reargument of, or in the alternative, for leave to
Liberty Mut. Insurance Co. v K.O. Med., P.C., 2016 NY Slip Op 06166 (1st Dept. 2016) Violation of 3.5(b); 3.6(b) (1) Plaintiffs seek, inter alia, a declaration
Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v Branch Med., P.C., 2016 NY Slip Op 31706(U)(Sup. Ct. NY Co. 2016) (1) In connection with one such claim, at an examination
State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v Thompson, 2016 NY Slip Op 51222(U)(Sup. Ct. Kings Co. 2016) This was a non-contact DJ Case. Plaintiff relied on the
Metro Health Prods., Inc. v Nationwide Ins., 2016 NY Slip Op 51122(U)(App. Term 2d Dept. 2016) “Nationwide had no basis to assert the defenses of collateral estoppel