Can a no-fault insurer deny or delay payment because workers’ compensation or another insurer is primary?

Short answer: Settled at the Appellate Division, no conflicting department. The governing rules are uniform where they have been decided. Workers' compensation is primary over no-fault (Insurance Law § 5102 [b] [2]; Arvatz, 1st Dept 1991; Quick, 3d Dept 2024), and the Workers' Compensation Board has primary jurisdiction over whether it applies (Court of Appeals: O'Rourke, Botwinick, Liss, not in the database), so a court faced with an insurer's showing of 'potential merit' must hold the no-fault claim in abeyance for a prompt Board application rather than decide employment status itself (2d Dept: LMK 2009, Dunn 2010; App Term 1st and 2d follow), while an insurer that offers no competent proof gets no referral and the defense fails (2d Dept: Westchester v American Tr. 2009, Abdelhaq 2007; 1st Dept: Global Liberty v North Shore 2019). As to another motor vehicle insurer, the first insurer notified must pay and arbitrate priority (1st Dept: M.N. Dental 2011; 2d Dept: Unitrin v Brand 2014, App Term 2d SZ Med. 2005). No department disagrees. The one open seam is preclusion: the Second Department holds the WC 'offset' is not a lack-of-coverage defense and is precluded without a timely denial (Westchester v Lincoln Gen. 2009, lv denied 13 NY3d 714), but App Term 2d treated an actual Board award as a lack of coverage that is not precluded (Active Care v Hartford 2018), and a 2005 Civil Court upheld an arbitrator's ruling that the defense is an exception to preclusion (JSI 2005).

Scope. Deciding this question means ruling, in a claim for first-party no-fault benefits (action, arbitration, or article 75 review of the award), on the insurer's position that someone else must pay first. Mostly that is workers' compensation: whether the injured person may have been an employee injured in the course of employment (including livery and black-car drivers, the Black Car Fund and the Uninsured Employers' Fund), whether the court must defer to the Workers' Compensation Board's primary jurisdiction and hold the claim in abeyance, whether the insurer's proof shows the defense's potential merit, whether the claim fails because the Board awarded compensation or the claimant never applied to the Board, and whether the defense is precluded by an untimely denial. It also covers the mirror rule for another motor vehicle insurer: under 11 NYCRR 65-3.12 (b) and 65-4.11 (a) (6) the first insurer notified must pay and arbitrate any priority dispute with the other insurer, unless it is not 'otherwise liable' at all (a lack of coverage).

Based on 79 decisions in our database, the most recent decided May 5, 2026.

Leading authorities · Governing regulations · Authority map · Decisions by court · Plain-text version (Markdown)

Leading authorities

LMK Psychological Serv., P.C. v American Tr. Ins. Co. (2009 NY Slip Op 06004) Appellate Division, Second Department, 2009Board has primary jurisdiction; courts must refer, not decide, WC barThe trial court erred in dismissing no-fault claims as barred by Workers' Compensation Law § 11 where the Board had made no determination; the Board has primary jurisdiction over coverage under the Workers' Compensation Law, so the claims had to be referred to it and the cross motion decided afterwards.
Those claims must be referred to the Workers’ Compensation Board for a determination as to whether the plaintiffs have a valid cause of action to recover no-fault benefits, or whether they are relegated to benefits under the Workers’ Compensation Law
M.N. Dental Diagnostics, P.C. v Government Empls. Ins. Co. (2011 NY Slip Op 01333) Appellate Division, First Department, 2011First insurer notified pays; priority dispute goes to arbitrationGEICO's denial on the ground that another insurer (Fidelity) was responsible raised a priority-of-payment dispute, not a coverage question (11 NYCRR 65-4.11 [a] [6]); as the first insurer notified it had to pay the provider, and the dispute between insurers belongs in mandatory arbitration.
Thus, as “the first insurer to whom notice of claim [was] given” (11 NYCRR 65-3.12 [b]), defendant was responsible or obligated to pay the no-fault benefits for the health services provided by plaintiff, irrespective of any issues of priority or source of payment.
Later history: Affirms the Appellate Term, First Department (M.N. Dental Diagnostics v GEICO, 2009 NY Slip Op 29266, post 8366)
Quick v State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. (2024 NY Slip Op 06268) Appellate Division, Third Department, 2024WC primary even with uninsured employer; seek WC firstBecause workers' compensation is primary to no-fault, an employee injured in the course of employment must first seek workers' compensation, through the Uninsured Employers' Fund where the employer had no coverage, before no-fault benefits; summary judgment dismissing his no-fault action was affirmed, with eligibility for the Board to decide first.
The fact that plaintiff’s employer did not possess workers’ compensation coverage at the time of the accident does not render him ineligible for Workers’ Compensation benefits; instead it changes the potential source of payment. As such, plaintiff was required to seek workers’ compensation benefits as the primary source of payment for his basic economic loss
Matter of Global Liberty Ins. Co. of N.Y. v North Shore Family Chiropractic, PC (2019 NY Slip Op 08951) Appellate Division, First Department, 2019Insurer must prove course of employment to deny on WCThe insurer's petition to vacate an award for the provider was dismissed: it failed to establish that the livery driver was injured in the course of employment (his TLC license was issued that day and there was no evidence he was on duty or carrying a passenger), so its workers' compensation denial was not proper.
Petitioner failed to establish that respondents’ assignor was injured in the course of his employment, and therefore that it properly denied his claim because workers’ compensation benefits were available to him
Westchester Med. Ctr. v Lincoln Gen. Ins. Co. (2009 NY Slip Op 02589) Appellate Division, Second Department, 2009WC offset is not a coverage defense; precluded if not timelySummary judgment for the hospital: the insurer raised no triable issue on workers' compensation coverage (investigator's hearsay only), and its possible entitlement to offset workers' compensation recovery is not a lack-of-coverage defense, so it is subject to the 30-day denial requirement.
Moreover, the defendant’s possible entitlement to offset any no-fault benefits it pays by any recovery pursuant to a Workers’ Compensation claim does not constitute a defense of lack of coverage, which is not subject to the requirement that there be timely service of the disclaimer
Later history: Leave to appeal denied, 13 NY3d 714 (2009), as cited in Devonshire Surgical Facility v Hereford (App Term 1st 2010, post 7582) and other decisions
A.B. Med. Servs., PLLC v American Tr. Ins. Co. (2009 NY Slip Op 29271) Appellate Term, Second Department, 2009Model order: abeyance pending Board, 90-day conditional dismissalThe insurer's proof raised a question of fact whether the assignor was acting as an employee, which the Board must resolve first; the provider's summary judgment motion was to be held in abeyance pending a prompt Board application, and dismissed if no proof of an application was filed within 90 days.
In the event plaintiffs fail to file proof with the District Court of such application within 90 days of the date of the order entered hereon, the District Court shall deny plaintiffs’ motion and grant reverse summary judgment in favor of defendant dismissing the complaint unless plaintiffs show good cause why the complaint should not be dismissed.
Later history: On the later appeal, A.B. Med. Servs. v American Tr. Ins. Co. (2012 NY Slip Op 50764(U), post 6906) affirmed summary judgment dismissing the complaint because no proper Board application had been made within the 90 days
O'Rourke v Long 41 NY2d 219Where WC availability turns on questions of fact or mixed questions, the claimant may not choose the courts; the Board decides first. Cited by about 33 decisions in the database.Not in our database.
Botwinick v Ogden 59 NY2d 909Primary jurisdiction over the applicability of the Workers' Compensation Law is vested in the Board; courts should not express views pending its determination (quoted in Dunn and most App Term decisions).Not in our database.
Liss v Trans Auto Sys. 68 NY2d 15If the issue was not litigated before the Board, the court should remit to the Board; a party without the chance to participate in the Board hearing is not bound by it (Lutheran).Not in our database.
Arvatz v Empire Mut. Ins. Co. 171 AD2d 262As between no-fault and workers' compensation, WC is primary and the injured person may not elect; employee vs independent contractor status of a livery driver is best decided by the Board.Not in our database.
Lanpont v Savvas Cab Corp. 244 AD2d 208A WC defense warrants Board review only where the record shows its 'potential merit' (A.B. Med. 2005 and trial courts).Not in our database.
Matter of Pacific Ins. Co. v State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. 150 AD2d 455Disputes between insurers about responsibility for first-party benefits must go to mandatory arbitration under § 5105 (b) (relied on by M.N. Dental and SZ Med.).Not in our database.
Paramount Ins. Co. v Miccio 169 AD2d 761, lv denied 78 NY2d 851Which insurer must pay first-party benefits is an inter-company dispute subject to mandatory arbitration (M.N. Dental).Not in our database.
Dietrick v Kemper Ins. Co. 76 NY2d 248No-fault benefits are reduced by workers' compensation recoverable under § 5102 (b) (2) (cited in Quick).Not in our database.

Governing regulations

Whether workers' compensation applies (employment, course of employment) is for the Workers' Compensation Board, which has primary jurisdiction; its primacy comes from Insurance Law § 5102 (b) (2) and the Workers' Compensation Law, not Part 65.

11 NYCRR 65-3.16 (a) (9) When the applicant is entitled to workers' compensation for the same accident, the compensation carrier is the sole source of reimbursement for medical expenses (Insurance Law 5102 (b) (2)).
11 NYCRR 65-3.12 (b) (1) In a priority dispute among insurers otherwise liable, the first insurer given notice pays the claimant and the insurers settle it in mandatory arbitration; under the case law another insurer's priority is no defense to the claim.

Also relevant

Chosen by us from the regulation text and the decisions on this question that cite it. Each link opens our copy of the regulation, which is unofficial; the official text is in the NYCRR.

Authority map

Each circle is a decision on this question, placed by court and date; its colour is the position it took. Lines are citations between them. Select a circle (or find a decision by name) to see its links and summary. The same decisions are listed by court below the map.

Workers' compensation may apply: the Board decides first and the no-fault claim waitsWorkers' compensation is primary and the claim against the no-fault insurer is dismissed or deniedThe insurer did not show that workers' compensation may apply; no referral, and the defense failsThe insurer may not rely on workers' compensation because it did not raise it in timeAnother insurer's possible priority is no defense: the first insurer notified pays, then arbitrates with the other insurerThe insurer was never liable: its objection is a lack of coverage, so the pay-first rule does not applyRing: rules on the question, but another ground decided the caseContrasted, distinguished or limitedDeclined to follow, questioned, overruled or reversedCited Show ordinary citations

Layout

The map loads when you scroll to it.

How the rule was applied, by court

Court	Referred to WC Board	WC primary: claim fails	WC defense not shown	WC defense precluded	First insurer must pay	No coverage, not priority	Total
Appellate Division, First Department	0	0	1	0	1	0	2
Appellate Division, Second Department	4	0	2	1	1	0	8
Appellate Division, Third Department	0	1	0	0	0	0	1
Appellate Term, First Department	2	0	0	1	2	0	5
Appellate Term, Second Department	25	9	3	4	1	0	42
Trial courts in the First Department	1	0	0	0	0	1	2
Trial courts in the Second Department	4	1	5	5	2	2	19

Decisions (79)

Every decision in our database that rules on this question: highest court first, then by department, newest first. 72 turn on it; the others rule on it alongside a different main ground (marked "also decides"). The one-sentence summaries describe what each court said on this question.

Appellate Division, First Department (2 decisions)

Matter of Global Liberty Ins. Co. of N.Y. v North Shore Family Chiropractic, PC (2019 NY Slip Op 08951) Leading case Appellate Division, First Department, December 12, 2019The insurer did not show that workers' compensation may apply; no referral, and the defense failsHeld the insurer failed to prove the livery driver was injured in the course of employment, since his TLC license issued that day and nothing showed he was on duty or carrying a passenger, so its WC denial was improper.
M.N. Dental Diagnostics, P.C. v Government Empls. Ins. Co. (2011 NY Slip Op 01333) Leading case Appellate Division, First Department, February 22, 2011Another insurer's possible priority is no defense: the first insurer notified pays, then arbitrates with the other insurerHeld the insurer's denial because another motor vehicle insurer was responsible raised a priority-of-payment dispute, not a coverage question, so as first insurer notified it had to pay and the dispute belonged in mandatory intercompany arbitration.

Appellate Division, Second Department (8 decisions)

State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v Amtrust N. Am., Inc. (2024 NY Slip Op 00646) Appellate Division, Second Department, February 7, 2024Workers' compensation may apply: the Board decides first and the no-fault claim waits (also decides)Held the Workers' Compensation Board had primary jurisdiction over whether the subrogors' medical expenses were compensable, so the no-fault insurer's reimbursement claim had to be referred to the Board before the motion was decided.
Matter of Unitrin Direct/Warner Ins. Co. v Brand (2014 NY Slip Op 05887) Appellate Division, Second Department, August 20, 2014Another insurer's possible priority is no defense: the first insurer notified pays, then arbitrates with the other insurer (also decides)Held the insured's own insurer's payment of first-party benefits implied no choice of Florida law because 65-3.12 required it to pay in the first instance, any priority dispute with the other insurer being for the insurers to resolve.
Dunn v American Tr. Ins. Co. (2010 NY Slip Op 01757) Appellate Division, Second Department, March 2, 2010Workers' compensation may apply: the Board decides first and the no-fault claim waitsHeld the insurer's motion raised factual questions whether the claimant was an independent contractor or a car service base's employee, which the Board has primary jurisdiction to decide, so the matter had to be referred to the Board before deciding the motion.
LMK Psychological Serv., P.C. v American Tr. Ins. Co. (2009 NY Slip Op 06004) Leading case Appellate Division, Second Department, July 28, 2009Workers' compensation may apply: the Board decides first and the no-fault claim waitsHeld the trial court erred in dismissing claims as barred by Workers' Compensation Law § 11 absent a Board determination, because the Board has primary jurisdiction, and remitted for a new determination following a prompt Board application.
Westchester Med. Ctr. v Lincoln Gen. Ins. Co. (2009 NY Slip Op 02589) Leading case Appellate Division, Second Department, March 31, 2009The insurer may not rely on workers' compensation because it did not raise it in timeHeld the insurer's possible entitlement to offset workers' compensation recovery was not a lack-of-coverage defense, so it was subject to the 30-day denial rule, and an investigator's hearsay raised no triable issue of workers' compensation coverage.
Westchester Med. Ctr. v American Tr. Ins. Co. (2009 NY Slip Op 01979) Appellate Division, Second Department, March 17, 2009The insurer did not show that workers' compensation may apply; no referral, and the defense fails (also decides)Declined to dismiss and refer the matter to the Workers' Compensation Board because the insurer offered no competent evidence in admissible form that workers' compensation benefits were available.
Matter of Lutheran Med. Ctr. v Hereford Ins. Co. (2007 NY Slip Op 06884) Appellate Division, Second Department, September 18, 2007Workers' compensation may apply: the Board decides first and the no-fault claim waitsHeld the award vacated and the employment question resubmitted to the Workers' Compensation Board, because the insurer, never notified of the Board hearing, was not bound by the Board's finding that the livery driver was not working.
Matter of Global Liberty Ins. Co. v Abdelhaq (2007 NY Slip Op 00643) Appellate Division, Second Department, January 30, 2007The insurer did not show that workers' compensation may apply; no referral, and the defense failsRefused to stay arbitration because the insured's workers' compensation claim had been denied and the insurer offered no evidence that the cab dispatch base was his employer at the time of the accident.

Appellate Division, Third Department (1 decision)

Quick v State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. (2024 NY Slip Op 06268) Leading case Appellate Division, Third Department, December 12, 2024Workers' compensation is primary and the claim against the no-fault insurer is dismissed or deniedAffirmed dismissal of the no-fault action because workers' compensation is primary and the injured employee had to seek it first, through the Uninsured Employers' Fund where his employer lacked coverage, before claiming no-fault benefits.

Appellate Term, First Department (5 decisions)

Sunrise Acupuncture PC v Global Liberty Ins. Co. of N.Y. (2018 NY Slip Op 51887(U)) Appellate Term, First Department, December 20, 2018The insurer may not rely on workers' compensation because it did not raise it in timeHeld the insurer could not invoke the Board's primary jurisdiction for the first time at trial nearly seven years into the litigation, having only pleaded it among many affirmative defenses, because doing so would merely delay the case.
AEE Med. Diagnostic, P.C. v Travelers Prop. Cas. Co. of Am. (2017 NY Slip Op 51209(U)) Appellate Term, First Department, September 22, 2017Workers' compensation may apply: the Board decides first and the no-fault claim waitsReversed an order directing trial on whether workers' compensation was primary because the assignor's statement raised triable issues of course of employment, which the Board must decide first; motions to be redetermined after a prompt Board application.
Pomona Med. Diagnostic P.C. v Adirondack Ins. Co. (2012 NY Slip Op 51165(U)) Appellate Term, First Department, June 25, 2012Another insurer's possible priority is no defense: the first insurer notified pays, then arbitrates with the other insurerHeld discovery on the insurer's defense that another carrier was primarily liable palpably improper, because under 65-3.12 (b) the insurer cannot rely on that defense to deny the no-fault claim.
Devonshire Surgical Facility, L.L.C. v Hereford Ins. Co. (2010 NY Slip Op 52297(U)) Appellate Term, First Department, December 7, 2010Workers' compensation may apply: the Board decides first and the no-fault claim waitsHeld the insurer's submissions raised a factual issue whether the loss occurred in the course of employment, within the Board's primary jurisdiction, so the summary judgment motions should have been held in abeyance pending a Board determination.
M.N. Dental Diagnostics, P.C. v Government Empls. Ins. Co. (2009 NY Slip Op 29266) Appellate Term, First Department, June 19, 2009Another insurer's possible priority is no defense: the first insurer notified pays, then arbitrates with the other insurerHeld the insurer's objection that the rental car's insurer should pay raised a priority-of-payment dispute, not coverage, since its own policy covered substitute vehicles, so as first insurer notified it had to pay and arbitrate with the other insurer.

Appellate Term, Second Department (42 decisions)

Active Care Med. Supply Corp. v Global Liberty Ins. (2021 NY Slip Op 50257(U)) Appellate Term, Second Department, March 26, 2021Workers' compensation may apply: the Board decides first and the no-fault claim waitsOrdered a new trial because the court should have considered the certified EUO transcript in deciding whether the insurer showed an issue whether the assignor was acting in the course of employment so that workers' compensation might be available.
Madison Prods. of USA, Inc. v American Tr. Ins. Co. (2020 NY Slip Op 50749(U)) Appellate Term, Second Department, June 26, 2020Workers' compensation may apply: the Board decides first and the no-fault claim waitsHeld the insurer's proof raised an issue whether the assignor was injured in the course of employment, so four claims were properly held in abeyance for the Board, while a hearing must decide whether the fifth claim's WC defense was precluded by untimely denial.
Compas Med., P.C. v American Tr. Ins. Co. (2019 NY Slip Op 52053(U)) Appellate Term, Second Department, December 13, 2019Workers' compensation is primary and the claim against the no-fault insurer is dismissed or deniedHeld the complaint properly dismissed because the provider failed to comply with the prior abeyance order requiring a proper application to the Board, rejecting the argument that a Board claim would be time-barred where the insurer timely denied on that ground.
Pavlova v American Tr. Ins. Co. (2019 NY Slip Op 51948(U)) Appellate Term, Second Department, November 29, 2019Workers' compensation may apply: the Board decides first and the no-fault claim waitsHeld, for the reasons of a companion decision, that the action was properly held in abeyance pending the Board's determination of whether the assignor was eligible for workers' compensation benefits.
Quality Health Prod., Inc. v American Tr. Ins. Co. (2019 NY Slip Op 51950(U)) Appellate Term, Second Department, November 29, 2019Workers' compensation may apply: the Board decides first and the no-fault claim waitsHeld the insurer's evidence raised an issue whether the assignor was acting in the course of employment, a question within the Board's primary jurisdiction, so the action was properly held in abeyance pending the Board's determination.
Y.A.M. Med. Supply, Inc. v Global Liberty Ins. Co. of NY (2019 NY Slip Op 51801(U)) Appellate Term, Second Department, November 1, 2019The insurer may not rely on workers' compensation because it did not raise it in timeHeld the workers' compensation eligibility defense subject to preclusion, so the insurer's cross motion for abeyance pending a Board determination was properly denied because it failed to show it timely denied the claims on that ground.
Metro Psychological Servs., P.C. v Travelers Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co. (2019 NY Slip Op 51150(U)) Appellate Term, Second Department, July 12, 2019Workers' compensation may apply: the Board decides first and the no-fault claim waitsHeld the insurer's evidence raised an issue whether the assignor was acting in the course of employment, which the Board must resolve, so the provider's summary judgment was reversed and the matter held in abeyance pending the Board's determination.
Active Care Med. Supply Corp. v American Tr. Ins. Co. (2019 NY Slip Op 50419(U)) Appellate Term, Second Department, March 22, 2019Workers' compensation may apply: the Board decides first and the no-fault claim waitsHeld the insurer's evidence raised a fact issue whether the assignor was acting in the course of employment, so eligibility for workers' compensation had to be resolved first by the Board and the action was properly held in abeyance.

Show all 42 decisions

Loading the list… If it does not appear, the full list is in the plain-text version.

Trial courts in the First Department (2 decisions)

Matter of Hereford Ins. Co. v Corona Med. PC (2021 NY Slip Op 50991(U)) Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County, October 20, 2021The insurer was never liable: its objection is a lack of coverage, so the pay-first rule does not applyHeld the first-insurer priority rule inapplicable because the insurer's policy covered only the assignor's own car, not the rented vehicle involved, so its denial raised lack of coverage, not a priority-of-payment dispute among liable insurers.
Lenox Hill Radiology, P.C. v American Tr. Ins. Co. (2008 NY Slip Op 50330(U)) Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County, February 25, 2008Workers' compensation may apply: the Board decides first and the no-fault claim waitsHeld the NF-2 admitting the claimant was working and a police report showing the vehicle was a taxi gave potential merit to the workers' compensation defense, so the complaint was dismissed without prejudice for the Board to decide.

Trial courts in the Second Department (19 decisions)

Alternative PLM Acupuncture, P.C v Nationwide Gen. Ins Co (2026 NY Slip Op 51325(U)) Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County, May 5, 2026The insurer may not rely on workers' compensation because it did not raise it in timeHeld the workers' compensation eligibility defense was neither lack of coverage nor a fee-schedule defense, so the insurer's untimely denial of the first bill precluded it, while summary judgment was granted on the timely denied second bill.
Yumi Acupuncture, P.C. v 21st Century Ins. Co. (2026 NY Slip Op 50433(U)) Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County, March 23, 2026Another insurer's possible priority is no defense: the first insurer notified pays, then arbitrates with the other insurerHeld that the first insurer notified had to pay irrespective of any interinsurer priority dispute, which belongs in mandatory arbitration, so its request for a Declaration of No Other Insurance was a nullity that did not toll the 30 days.
Advantage Radiology, P.C. v ACE Am. Ins. Co. (2026 NY Slip Op 50245(U)) Civil Court of the City of New York, Richmond County, January 27, 2026The insurer may not rely on workers' compensation because it did not raise it in timeDenied the insurer's motion to dismiss despite a Board finding that the accident was work-related, because the workers' compensation defense must be raised in a timely denial and the insurer showed no timely denial or verification request.
American Tr. Ins. Co. v PDA NY Chiropractic, P.C. (2023 NY Slip Op 50938(U)) Supreme Court, Kings County, September 1, 2023Workers' compensation is primary and the claim against the no-fault insurer is dismissed or denied (also decides)Held the insurer was entitled to pend the bills for livery-fund information on the assignor's possible workers' compensation eligibility, and that the arbitrator arbitrarily excused it based on the assignor's testimony, so those bills were premature.
American Tr. Ins. Co. v Nexray Med. Imaging PC (2023 NY Slip Op50538(U)) Supreme Court, Kings County, May 28, 2023The insurer did not show that workers' compensation may apply; no referral, and the defense fails (also decides)Held that after the WC Board found no compensable work accident, the insurer's earlier WC denial did not restart its time to deny, so the later medical-necessity defense was precluded and the award stood.
American Tr. Ins. Co. v North Shore Family Chiropractic PC (2023 NY Slip Op 50208(U)) Supreme Court, Kings County, March 20, 2023The insurer did not show that workers' compensation may apply; no referral, and the defense failsUpheld the arbitrator's rejection of the course-of-employment defense because a police report showing TC plates and no passengers, without a livery policy, was speculation lacking potential merit and did not require referral to the Board.
Parisien v Farmers Ins. (2022 NY Slip Op 22309) Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County, September 30, 2022The insurer was never liable: its objection is a lack of coverage, so the pay-first rule does not applyHeld the first-insurer-pays rule and mandatory intercompany arbitration did not apply because the insurer denied for lack of coverage, its policy excluding ride-sharing use, rather than claiming another insurer was responsible, so there was no priority dispute.
Ultimate Massage Therapy, P.C. v Utica Mut. Ins. Co. (2020 NY Slip Op 51613(U)) Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County, April 30, 2021Workers' compensation may apply: the Board decides first and the no-fault claim waitsHeld the insurer's summary-judgment motion in abeyance pending a Board determination, because the applicability of the Workers' Compensation Law is for the Board, even though the insurer's evidence of employment was inadmissible.

Show all 19 decisions

Loading the list… If it does not appear, the full list is in the plain-text version.

How this page is made: the decisions are those in our case-law database that cite this question's leading cases or were tagged with its subject. A language model read each one in full and recorded whether it rules on the question, the position it took and a one-sentence summary; a second, independent reading checked every entry. Court, department, date and the citation links come from the database. Read the decision before relying on it.