No Fault Defender – A Defense Attorney's Perspective on New York No-Fault Law
By: Jason Tenenbaum
IME no- show on reargument
January 18th, 2013 | Author: JT
I like this case because the Court here in the Unitrin scenario realized where it went awry and righted a wrong. American Transit Ins. Co. v. Barbara Ramirez, Index #: 307795/11 (Sup. Ct. Bronx Co. 2013).
Posted in IME issues
Leave a Reply
Categories
Contact Jason Tenenbaum
(516)750-0595 (T)
(516)414-2869 (F)
Jason@jtnylaw.com
Our No-Fault Practice
I believe that what makes our law firm stand out from other defense firms is the precision of our motion and appellate work, as well as our overall case handling. My track record at the appellate courts and motion courts may be found in the "About JT" tool bar. If you want a properly drafted appellate brief or a properly handled case from inception to conclusion at a reasonable price, send me an email or give me a telephone call.
My Law Firm
Recent Comments
- Rookie on An IME no show case
- Rookie on Discovery not necessary to adjudicate merits of EUO no-show defense
- Rookie on EUO statements of law
- Kurt Lundgren on
- Captain America on
- caveman on
- Captain America on The teeth were taken out of CPLR 3408
- Kurt Lundgren on Great Wall is binding precedent on American Arbitration Association
- Hmmm on Great Wall is binding precedent on American Arbitration Association
- Captain America on Great Wall is binding precedent on American Arbitration Association
Categories
- 5102(d) issues (33)
- Additional Verification (40)
- Arbitrations (17)
- Article 75 (11)
- Attorney fee (3)
- Bad Faith (3)
- Calendar Control (1)
- Choice of law (6)
- Consumer Fraud (1)
- Coverage (78)
- Cancellation of policy (2)
- Causation (16)
- Declaratory Judgments (4)
- Intentional loss (9)
- Material misrepresentation – procurement of insurance policy (8)
- No loss (5)
- No Policy of Insurance (2)
- Non eligible injured person (5)
- Policy Exhaustion (5)
- Resident Relative (4)
- Staged loss (3)
- Use and Operation (7)
- Damages (4)
- interest (4)
- Deductible issues (3)
- Defamation (1)
- Defaults (30)
- 3215(f) issues (4)
- Adjournments (3)
- Claims office failure (4)
- Law Office Failure (8)
- Discontinuances (1)
- Discovery (47)
- Bill of Particulars issues (1)
- Discovery sanctions (11)
- EBT issues (20)
- HIPPA issues (2)
- Notice of Trial issues (3)
- Spoliation (1)
- DWI issues (6)
- EUO issues (56)
- Evidence (106)
- 4404(a) & weight of evidence review (3)
- Business records (33)
- collateral estoppel (4)
- Expert journals and treatises (4)
- Experts (42)
- Hearsay (33)
- Fee Schedule (55)
- Florida issues (3)
- Fraud (6)
- General non-cooperation (1)
- IME issues (60)
- Jurisdiction (1)
- Jury Issues (1)
- Mailing (27)
- Mallela issues (23)
- Medical Necessity (120)
- Mr. Five Boro Award (9)
- Non receipt of bill (5)
- Paid (2)
- Pleadings (3)
- Amendments (3)
- Preservation of defenses on NF-10 (17)
- Prima Facie case (57)
- Priority of Payment (2)
- Procedural Issues (142)
- 2106 and 2309 (20)
- 3404 (2)
- Affidavits (12)
- Consolidation (2)
- Counterclaims (1)
- Declaratory Judgment Action (5)
- Deposition transcripts (1)
- Directed Verdicts (2)
- Hypo-technical defects (13)
- Judgments (4)
- Pleading defects (6)
- Renew and reargue (12)
- Replies (3)
- Res Judicata (7)
- Stipulations (3)
- Striking Notices of Trial (4)
- Subpoenas (1)
- Summary Judgment Issues (25)
- Severence (3)
- Standing (20)
- Statute of Limitations (8)
- Statutory interest (7)
- Timely notice of claim (11)
- Timely submissions of Bills (13)
- Uncategorized (127)
- Venue (2)
- Workers Compensation (15)
- Zuppa (4)