Over 2,500 case notes and articles on New York court decisions, organized by practice area and topic. Spanning 2008 to 2026, the archive records what the courts have decided on the questions that come up in no-fault, personal injury, civil procedure and employment cases.
Written and maintained by the Law Office of Jason Tenenbaum, P.C., Huntington Station, New York.
2,527
Legal Articles
4,478
Case Citations
43
Topic Hubs
18+
Years of Coverage
4
Practice Areas
Article Distribution by Practice Area
Statutes and regulations set the rules; court decisions decide what the rules require on a given record. A regulation gives an insurer 30 calendar days to pay or deny a no-fault claim (11 NYCRR 65-3.8(c)); the case notes record what happened when the denial was late, or when the verification request that stopped the clock was itself late. This encyclopedia collects the firm's notes on those decisions and sorts them into four areas: no-fault insurance, personal injury, civil procedure, and employment discrimination.
Each topic has a start-here article and a directory of dated case notes. The start-here article states the current rule with its citation and says which older notes still hold; the directory keeps every note, newest first, so a reader can see when a court changed course. A medical provider with a no-fault billing dispute, an injured person asking about the serious injury threshold, and an employee with a workplace discrimination complaint each start from a different topic hub.
The notes cover trial court, Appellate Term, Appellate Division and Court of Appeals decisions; the date range and the newest article appear in the By the Numbers section above. When a later decision or an amendment changes the rule, the older note keeps its original text and carries a dated Legal Update notice pointing to the current article. The archive is written and maintained by Jason Tenenbaum, admitted to practice in 2002, and each note first appears on the firm's blog.
1,315 articles · all topics in this area
New York's no-fault system pays first-party benefits after a motor vehicle accident, and the regulations in 11 NYCRR Part 65 set the deadlines for claims, verification requests, examinations and denials. The case notes in this area follow how New York courts have applied those rules in disputes among medical providers, injured people and insurers.
Case notes on the insurer's medical examination as a condition of coverage: proof that the scheduling letters were mailed, proof of the non-appearance from a person with personal knowledge, and the timing of the denial. The start-here article reads four 2019 Appellate Term decisions with the 2025 Gaines decision.
The examination under oath: the objective justification the regulation requires for the demand (11 NYCRR 65-3.5(e)), scheduling and mailing proof, and the consequence of a non-appearance. The start-here article reads Gentlecare (2019) with the Second Department's Clennon decision.
Fee-schedule proof, coding disputes and the post-2013 excessive-fee rules. A preserved defense still needs evidence; the archive separates older rate decisions from later developments.
Verification requests, response evidence and denial timing. Chapa (2026) rejected a mandatory 150-day denial deadline; it did not make unanswered claims automatically withdrawn. The start-here article indexes the historical notes by issue.
Medical-necessity disputes turn on the reports, the opposing evidence and denial timing. This archive separates summary-judgment rulings, IME cutoffs and trial testimony, with a 2026 decision that keeps denial timing apart from the medical defense.
Case notes on the priority of payment regulation (11 NYCRR 65-3.15), which sets the order in which no-fault claims are paid as the coverage limit is reached, and on policy exhaustion as a defense. The start-here article covers the 2024 and 2025 Appellate Division decisions confirming arbitration awards on policy exhaustion.
Proof of mailing for denials, examination notices and verification requests: the affidavit of actual mailing or of a standard office practice, and why a bare denial of receipt does not rebut it. The start-here article is a 2017 note on a mailing affidavit that failed.
Procurement misrepresentation requires claim-specific denial timing and proof of materiality. The archive separates those defenses from retroactive rescission and out-of-state policy disputes.
504 articles · all topics in this area
Case notes and articles on New York injury claims: motor vehicle accidents and the serious injury threshold in Insurance Law § 5102(d), proof of causation where a prior condition exists, damages evidence, and claims outside the motor vehicle such as falls, dog bites, construction sites and workers' compensation.
Case notes on the serious injury definition in Insurance Law § 5102(d): fractures, permanent and significant limitations of use, and the objective medical proof each category requires. For actions commenced on or after May 26, 2026, the 90/180-day category no longer applies; older notes are read under the version that governed their cases.
Medical evidence of accident-related aggravation, prior conditions and treatment gaps, with dated case notes and the 2026 serious-injury amendment.
Range-of-motion evidence and pain-and-suffering case notes, with the 2026 Hiller decision applying Mondesir and a dated explanation of the serious-injury amendment.
Articles on New York car, truck and motorcycle accident claims: liability, police reports, uninsured motorist coverage, comparative fault, and how first-party benefits and the serious injury threshold fit together.
628 articles · all topics in this area
The CPLR as New York courts apply it: motion practice, summary judgment, defaults and vacatur, business records and other evidence, affirmations, discovery, service and jurisdiction, statutes of limitations, discontinuance, and the preclusive effect of earlier decisions.
What a provider must show to make a prima facie case for overdue no-fault benefits, and what an insurer must show in reply. The start-here article is a 2014 note on proof that the bills were submitted and that the insurer did not pay or deny them in time.
CPLR 3212 as the courts apply it: the 120-day clock that runs from service, the proof package under CPLR 3212(b), discovery as a reason to deny the motion under CPLR 3212(f), and the limits of CPLR 3212(g). The start-here article is a practitioner's guide with the case notes linked by issue.
CPLR 2214 notice schedules, the good-cause gate for late papers under CPLR 2214(c), and how courts weigh the excuse, the delay and the prejudice. The start-here article walks through the schedules and links the decisions on late papers.
CPLR 2221 cases on reargument, renewal and orders made without notice. The archive distinguishes discretionary late reargument, explanations for missing proof and corrected papers, with 2025 and 2026 decisions.
Notice deadlines, court-ordered withdrawal and defense fees, with the 2025 and 2026 decisions distinguishing discontinuance from a reset of foreclosure limitations.
CPLR 4518 foundation requirements, records incorporated from another business, police reports, certified government records under CPLR 4518(c), and copies and summaries. The start-here article is a guide to the foundation, with the decisions linked by record type.
CPLR 308 methods for serving an individual: personal delivery, delivery to a person of suitable age and discretion with a mailing, affix-and-mail after due diligence, and court-ordered service, with the case notes on defective service, cures and waiver.
Missing motion papers, signature objections and caption errors, with the distinction between technical service defects and the absent summons in Nicholas (2026).
Good cause, late opposition and adjournment requests, with separate rules for service and post-trial deadlines. The 2026 D'Andrade decision illustrates the limits on extra service time.
Affirmations after the 2024 and 2025 CPLR 2106 amendments, with historical notes on signer eligibility, notarization, conformity certificates and correcting defective papers.
Law office failure, nonreceipt, default-judgment proof and notice, late answers and vacatur: historical case notes with current statutory references and 2026 decisions.
Who may give opinion testimony, how journals and treatises may be used, and what a peer review report must contain to carry a medical necessity defense. The start-here article is a 2012 note on peer review reports.
Res judicata and collateral estoppel: when an arbitration award or a declaratory judgment binds a later action, and the factual distinctions that keep an earlier decision from controlling. The start-here article is a 2019 explainer.
80 articles · all topics in this area
Articles on New York employment law for employees on Long Island and in New York City: discrimination and harassment under the Human Rights Law and Title VII, retaliation and wrongful termination, and wage and hour claims.
Articles on discrimination and harassment claims under the New York State Human Rights Law, the New York City Human Rights Law and Title VII, including age, disability and pregnancy claims and the agency and court routes for filing them.
Articles on retaliation and wrongful termination in New York: complaints about discrimination or pay, accommodation requests, whistleblowing under Labor Law § 740, and when a resignation counts as a constructive discharge.
Articles on pregnancy discrimination at work: adverse actions tied to pregnancy, childbirth or a related condition, accommodation and leave, and the claims available under federal, New York State and New York City law.
Articles on unpaid wages, overtime, minimum wage, tip credits, misclassification as an independent contractor and pay transparency under the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor Law.
The statutes change too. The Downstate New York Law Tracker records, twice a week, what the Legislature, the governor, the New York City Council and the Nassau and Suffolk County Legislatures delivered, signed, enacted and vetoed in the firm's practice lanes, with a link to each official record. When a change alters a rule stated in a case note here, the note carries a dated "Law changed" line.
A decision on, say, the proof required for an IME no-show defense builds on earlier decisions and sometimes departs from them. In 2006 the Second Department held that attendance at the insurer's medical examination is a condition precedent to the insurer's liability on the policy, and that the insurer must prove the mailing and the non-appearance through people with personal knowledge (Stephen Fogel Psychological, P.C. v Progressive Cas. Ins. Co., 35 AD3d 720 (2d Dept 2006)). The notes that follow record how later courts applied that rule to vendor affidavits, address disputes and time lapses.
The encyclopedia keeps that sequence visible. Each topic hub leads to a start-here article, and the start-here article links the dated notes behind it. An older note is not rewritten to match the current rule; it keeps its text as a record of the law on its date and carries a Legal Update notice that points to the current article.
How the main no-fault topics connect, from the claim to its final resolution. Click a node to open that topic.
A sample of the archive's IME no-show notes, from an early proof decision to the current start-here article. The full directory is in the hub.
Radiology Today v GEICO: the vendor manager's mailing procedure and the examiners' sworn statements were accepted as proof of the no-show.
Excel Radiology v Utica Mutual: the insurer's motion failed because it did not establish that the notices were mailed and that the assignor did not appear.
Sunrise Acupuncture v Encompass: the Appellate Term, First Department, accepted sworn statements from the examining physician and a billing employee with personal knowledge of the office procedure.
Further notes on mailing proof, addresses and scheduling, listed in the hub.
The start-here article: what the 2019 decisions decided, read with the 2025 Gaines decision, and the directory of every note in the topic.
Every case citation found in the encyclopedia, charted by year and court level.
2,412 dated citations spanning 1976 to 2026
4,478 distinct citations across all reporters
Short answers, each with the statute, regulation or decision it rests on.
Answers to common questions about this resource and how to use it.
No. The articles, case notes and summaries in this encyclopedia are published for general informational and educational purposes only. They are not legal advice, and reading them does not create an attorney-client relationship. The outcome of a matter depends on its own facts and on the version of the statute or regulation in force for that case, which a general note cannot know. If you need advice about a claim, contact the Law Office of Jason Tenenbaum, P.C. at (516) 750-0595 for a free consultation.
Continuously, as decisions are published. A new case note is added when a New York court decides a question the archive follows, and a topic's start-here article is revised when a decision or an amendment changes the rule. Older notes keep their original text and receive a dated Legal Update notice pointing to the current article. The last update date and the newest article appear in the By the Numbers section at the top of this page, and each note shows its own last-reviewed date.
Use it to learn the rule and the questions a court will ask; do not use it as a substitute for advice on your own facts. A decision discussed here may turn on a record, a department or a version of the statute that does not match your case, and the 2026 motor vehicle amendments apply only to actions commenced on or after May 26, 2026. Read the start-here article for your topic, note its citations, and bring them to a free consultation with the Law Office of Jason Tenenbaum, P.C.
Four areas, each with its own topic hubs.
Jason Tenenbaum, the founder of the Law Office of Jason Tenenbaum, P.C. in Huntington Station, New York, writes the case notes and the start-here articles. He was admitted to practice in 2002 and founded the firm in 2009. Each note is written from the published decision and gives the court, the date and the citation, so a reader can check the source. Where a note has been reviewed since it was written, it shows the reviewer and the review date.
Start with the topic hub closest to your problem, then read its start-here article. Each note is written from a published decision and names the court, the date and the citation, so you can read the decision yourself and see which rule the court applied. Where the law has changed since a note was written, a dated Legal Update notice says so.
Every case turns on its own facts and on the record in front of the court. When you have read the rule, talk to a lawyer about how it applies to yours. At the Law Office of Jason Tenenbaum, P.C., consultations are free and confidential, and personal injury and employment discrimination matters are handled on a contingency fee that the written retainer explains.
The firm handles the no-fault, personal injury and employment matters these notes describe. Consultations are free and confidential.
Serving Nassau County, Suffolk County & all of Long Island, New York
The Law Office of Jason Tenenbaum, P.C. was founded in 2009 by Jason Tenenbaum, who was admitted to practice in 2002. The office is at 326 Walt Whitman Road, Suite C, Huntington Station, New York 11746, and represents injured people and employees on Long Island and in New York City in personal injury, employment, no-fault insurance and workers' compensation matters. The office staff speak English, Spanish, Italian, Japanese and Russian.
Jason Tenenbaum's writing on New York no-fault and civil procedure decisions is the source of this encyclopedia; the notes date from the firm's first years and continue as new decisions are published. Much of the firm's work has been no-fault litigation and appeals, which is why the archive's coverage of that area is the deepest.
Attorney Jason Tenenbaum has recovered more than $100 million for clients since 2002. Personal injury and employment discrimination matters are handled on a contingency fee, with no fee unless we win; consultations are free and confidential. The practice covers motor vehicle, pedestrian and bicycle accidents, falls and premises claims, medical malpractice, product liability, dog bites, construction accidents, wrongful death, workplace discrimination, wrongful termination and harassment, wage and hour claims, no-fault insurance disputes and workers' compensation. Call (516) 750-0595 to arrange a consultation.
Injured? Don't Wait.
Get Your Free Case Review Today
No fees unless we win — available 24/7 for emergencies.