Putting the wrong floor is not fatal
Court rules that incorrect floor designation in IME notice mailing address is not fatal when building address is otherwise correct and proper mailing procedures followed.
Read More →Mailing
53 articles by Jason Tenenbaum, Esq.
Mailing, again
New York's Second Department reinforces strict RPAPL 1304 mailing requirements in mortgage cases, emphasizing the need for proper evidence of both certified and first-class mail compliance.
Read More →
Certified Mail and Regular Mail
New York court clarifies that EUO scheduling letters sent by regular mail are sufficient - certified mail is not required for valid examination under oath notices.
Read More →
Understanding Verification Requests in New York No-Fault Insurance Claims
Insurance companies use verification requests to delay no-fault benefits. Learn your rights regarding verification mailing, responses & dispute tactics. Call 516-750-0595
Read More →
Nexus between receipt and mailing
Court ruling clarifies that insurance company's internal mail handling procedures are irrelevant when proving proper mailing of EUO scheduling letters under CPLR 3212(g).
Read More →
VA substantive law; NY Procedural law
New York courts apply substantive law from other states but use NY procedural law, as shown in this GEICO case involving Virginia insurance law and mailing requirements.
Read More →
State Farm and Georgia – passes Appellate Term scrutiny
State Farm's Georgia mail processing system passes Appellate Term scrutiny despite mailing challenges in no-fault insurance case Maiga v State Farm.
Read More →
Mailing again, again
New York foreclosure case demonstrates that conclusory statements about mailing procedures are insufficient; requires sworn testimony from someone with personal knowledge.
Read More →
Mailing – CPLR 4518(a)
Court ruling highlights stricter requirements for proving mailing under CPLR 4518(a), requiring detailed affidavits about office procedures beyond just documentary evidence.
Read More →
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.
Read More →
Allstate’s inability to prove the timely mailing of claims documents
Seven court cases show Allstate's repeated failure to prove timely mailing of claims documents, highlighting a critical issue in no-fault insurance litigation.
Read More →
It was not mailed, again
Court finds insurance carrier failed to prove proper mailing of denial forms, highlighting critical documentation requirements in no-fault cases.
Read More →
Notice of intent to cancel – premium finance company
Court ruling highlights insufficient affidavits in no-fault cases where mailing procedures for cancellation notices weren't properly documented by insurers.
Read More →
Allstate mailing issues
Pattern of Allstate mailing failures emerges in New York courts, with multiple 2016 cases showing the insurer's inability to prove timely delivery of denial letters.
Read More →
Allstate EUO no-show cases
Court rejects Allstate's EUO no-show defense due to insufficient proof of nonappearance, highlighting the importance of proper documentation in no-fault insurance disputes.
Read More →
Maya cannot prove anything is mailed
Maya Insurance Co. loses three no-fault cases due to claims adjuster's contradictory testimony about mailing denial forms before her employment start date.
Read More →
Trial de novo summary judgment motion appealed
Appellate Division reverses trial court on no-fault insurance denial mailing practices and medical necessity evidence, establishing prima facie case standards.
Read More →
Make a promise in your papers and fail to keep it? Summary judgment lost
Court case shows how matching the wrong documents to an affidavit can destroy an insurance company's summary judgment motion in no-fault litigation.
Read More →
Non-Receipt and medical necessity
Court ruling highlights the critical difference between claiming you mailed documents and proving proper mailing procedures in no-fault insurance claims.
Read More →
Another Mailing
Court rejects mailing affidavit from employee who started after the denial was sent, highlighting importance of personal knowledge in proving proper mailing procedures.
Read More →
First class mail is sufficient even when certified mailing is returned
Court rules first class mail is sufficient for EUO notices even when certified mail tracking shows non-delivery, expanding mailing requirement precedent.
Read More →
Mailing and the first time “objective” has landed in a medical rational case
Court ruling establishes "objective medical explanation" requirement for no-fault insurance medical necessity defenses and highlights proper mailing procedure standards.
Read More →
On receipt and mailing
Analysis of Medcare Supply v Farmers decision on no-fault insurance mailing requirements and affidavit standards for proving receipt and non-receipt of claims.
Read More →
Mailing and denial issues
Court rules on no-fault insurance denial mailing issues in Urban Well Acupuncture v American Commerce, highlighting defective mailing proof and proper denial procedures.
Read More →
It was timely
New York appellate court clarifies when insurance companies can prove they properly mailed denial of claim forms through affidavit testimony from litigation examiners.
Read More →
Insufficient proof that the IME letters were not received
Court ruling on insufficient proof that IME scheduling letters were not received in NY no-fault insurance case, establishing mailing presumptions and burden of proof.
Read More →
Where did 4518 come from?
New York Appellate Term references CPLR 4518 in no-fault mailing case, raising questions about business record foundations and evolving legal standards.
Read More →
Mailing from the Court of Appeals – kind of important
Court of Appeals ruling on Preferred Mutual v Donnelly establishes less restrictive test for insurance mailing requirements and proper notice procedures.
Read More →
Mailing challenge unpreserved
Court dismisses mailing challenge raised for first time on appeal in no-fault insurance case, emphasizing importance of preserving legal arguments at trial level.
Read More →
No personal knowledge of the practice and procedure to mail the suspension notice results in vacatur of conviction
Court vacates aggravated unlicensed operation conviction due to insufficient proof of proper DMV mailing procedures and lack of personal knowledge testimony.
Read More →
Claims documents considered as business records and unsuccessful mailing challenge
Court ruling on business records admissibility under CPLR 4518 and successful mailing challenges in insurance cases, lowering the burden of proof for standard office procedures.
Read More →
The Usual Mailing Arguments Have Fallen on Deaf Ears (Again): When Courts Reject Technical Challenges
Courts reject excessive technical challenges in no-fault insurance cases. Expert analysis of Quality Psychological case from Long Island. Call 516-750-0595.
Read More →
The United States Postal Service at the Appellate Term (again?)
Appellate Term case Vista Surgical v Clarendon shows prima facie mailing case failed when certified mail receipt lacked proper documentation and witness testimony.
Read More →
How do you overcome the presumption of mailing?
Learn how to overcome mailing presumptions in NY no-fault insurance cases. Expert analysis of court requirements for affidavits and proof standards.
Read More →
Mailing not proven through witness that was not present when items was deposited into the trusty USPS
Court rules that witness who wasn't present during mailing cannot prove proper service, highlighting importance of firsthand testimony in no-fault cases.
Read More →
Mailing case – sent but never received
New York court ruling on proving non-receipt of mailed documents in no-fault insurance cases, establishing standards for rebutting mailing presumptions.
Read More →
Mailing discrepencies and the way to prove non-receipt
Court case demonstrates how mailing discrepancies can undermine no-fault insurance claims when dates don't align with alleged service dates.
Read More →
You can't swear about things that happened at your job before you got there
New York court ruling highlights why insurance companies can't rely on employee testimony about mailing practices that occurred before their employment began.
Read More →
Mailing
Legal precedent shows incomplete mailing addresses can rebut delivery presumption in insurance cases when combined with evidence of postal service practices.
Read More →
Mailing turned on its head
NY court ruling establishes strong presumption for proper mailing in no-fault insurance cases, making it difficult for providers to deny receipt of verification requests.
Read More →
DWI defense non-upheld: mailing, denials and affidavits gone awry
Analysis of catastrophic DWI defense failures due to defective NF-10 forms and mailing errors. Expert no-fault insurance representation in Long Island & NYC.
Read More →
Understanding No-Fault Insurance Mailing Requirements: Lessons from the First Department’s “Venom” Decision
Learn about New York no-fault insurance mailing requirements from the First Department's Lenox Hill decision. Expert legal help from Long Island attorneys. Call 516-750-0595.
Read More →
The Appellate Division weighs in on the mailing paradigm
Appellate Division ruling on mailing paradigm requirements for DMV license suspension notices, addressing witness testimony standards and procedural evidence rules.
Read More →![I was employed with [BLANK] when the mailing activity occurred](https://cdn.jtnylaw.com/blog/i-was-emoloyed-with-blank-when-the-mailing-activity-occurred.avif)
I was employed with [BLANK] when the mailing activity occurred
New York court ruling shows insurance companies must prove proper mailing procedures through qualified witnesses who were actually employed during the relevant time period.
Read More →
There is no need to specify the particular date a denial was mailed on the affidavit
Court rules that insurance companies don't need to specify exact mailing dates in affidavits when proving timely denial of no-fault claims under standard office procedures.
Read More →
Be careful what you ask for: Discovery by summary judgment motion
Learn how summary judgment motions in no-fault insurance cases can backfire on carriers when discovery rules work against them in medical necessity disputes.
Read More →
Why don't Defendant's start to use the Notice to Admit to establish their Prima Facie? Am I missing something?
Exploring whether defendants can use Notices to Admit to establish prima facie cases in New York no-fault insurance litigation and departmental differences.
Read More →
Inconsistencies in the proof of mailing end plaintiff's quest for summary judgment
Court denies plaintiff's summary judgment motion due to inconsistencies between billing manager's affidavit and mailing certificate in no-fault insurance case.
Read More →
Peer Review Reports in No-Fault Insurance: Elmont Open MRI v State Farm
Learn how the Elmont Open MRI v State Farm case impacts personal injury claims and what peer review reports mean for your recovery.
Read More →
A tongue twister from the Fourth Department
Fourth Department appellate court ruling on res judicata, law of the case doctrine, and prima facie requirements in no-fault insurance mailing disputes.
Read More →
Proof of actually mailing an item certified mail RRR is sufficient to prima facie demonstrate proper mailing of an item
Court ruling establishes that testimony of actual certified mail sending creates presumption of proper mailing, even without matching return receipt cards.
Read More →![I was employed with [entity] for the duration of the claim](https://cdn.jtnylaw.com/blog/insurance-affidavit-employment-duration-requirements-new-york.avif)
I was employed with [entity] for the duration of the claim
Learn about insurance affidavit employment duration requirements in NY no-fault cases. Expert legal analysis of Points of Health v GEICO case. Call 516-750-0595.
Read More →
The first of hopefully many
Long Island personal injury law blog discusses landmark Bongiorno v State Farm decision, marking first Richmond County reversal on medical necessity summary judgment in no-fault insurance cases.
Read More →