David M Barshay

June 23, 2009 | New York Law Journal

David M. Barshay, a partner at Baker, Sanders, Barshay, Grossman, Fass, Muhlstock and Neuwirth, writes that the defense of "Workers' Comp" - that is, that the claimant was injured in the course of his or her employment and therefore is not entitled to no-fault benefits - has historically been misunderstood and misapplied by both sides of the bar, as well as the judiciary.

By David M. Barshay

15 minute read

September 30, 2008 | New York Law Journal

David M. Barshay, a partner at Baker, Sanders, Barshay, Grossman, Fass, Muhlstock and Neuwirth, and Jill Lakin Schatz, a solo practitioner, write that the Appellate Division, Second Department recently handed down a ground-breaking decision holding that that intentional accidents, while not covered under uninsured motorist provisions, are covered under no-fault insurance.

By David M. Barshay and Jill Lakin Schatz

14 minute read

June 24, 2008 | New York Law Journal

David M. Barshay, a partner at Baker, Sanders, Barshay, Grossman, Fass, Muhlstock and Neuwirth, and Mitchell S. Lustig, an attorney associated with Nicolini, Paradise Ferretti & Sabella, write that the Court of Appeals recently granted plaintiff's cross-motion for summary judgment and denied defendant's motion for the same relief, holding a defense of fraud based upon the allegation that the services billed for were never provided is waived if not preserved in a timely denial of claim.

By David M. Barshay and Mitchell S. Lustig

14 minute read

February 10, 2011 | New York Law Journal

In his No-Fault Insurance Wrap-Up, David M. Barshay, a partner at Baker, Sanders, Barshay, Grossman, Fass, Muhlstock and Neuwirth, writes that in 2008 the Court of Appeals set down what was then perceived as a "bright line" rule concerning the application of the "30-day preclusion rule" to various coverage defenses.

By David M. Barshay

12 minute read

October 14, 2010 | New York Law Journal

In his No-Fault Insurance Wrap-Up, David M. Barshay of Baker, Sanders, Barshay, Grossman, Fass, Muhlstock and Neuwirth reviews recent decisions that dismissed an action based on a plaintiff's assignor's failure to appear for an examination under oath, found that a peer reviewer's assumption that a test was not performed because it was not noted in medical records was speculative, and more.

By David M. Barshay

10 minute read

December 22, 2009 | New York Law Journal

David M. Barshay, a partner at Baker, Sanders, Barshay, Grossman, Fass, Muhlstock & Neuwirth, offers an examination of HIPAA and the Privacy Rule as it relates to no-fault litigation. He pays specific attention to how to identify who is a "covered entity" under HIPAA, and examines the permissive uses of protected health information even where a party is a "covered entity."

By David M. Barshay

12 minute read

August 11, 2011 | New York Law Journal

In his Debtor-Creditor Law Wrap-Up, David M. Barshay of Baker, Sanders, Barshay, Grossman, Fass, Muhlstock and Neuwirth notes that with the dramatic decrease in the number of estates that actually go through formal probate, there is often no executor or administrator, and a debt collector is often unable to determine who has the authority to discuss and/or pay a decedent's debts.

By David M. Barshay

11 minute read

April 14, 2011 | New York Law Journal

In his Debtor-Creditor Law Wrap-Up, David M. Barshay, a member of Baker, Sanders, Barshay, Grossman, Fass, Muhlstock and Neuwirth, writes that Second Circuit recently considered whether a debt collector violates the FDCPA's venue provisions by suing a consumer in a city court in the State of New York when the city court lacks power to hear the action because the consumer does not reside in that city or a town contiguous by land thereto, regardless of whether the debtor resides in the same county in which the city court is located.

By David M. Barshay

14 minute read

April 30, 2008 | New York Law Journal

David M. Barshay, a partner at Baker, Sanders, Barshay, Grossman, Fass, Muhlstock and Neuwirth, and Jill Lakin Schatz, a solo practitioner, write that it would appear as if a bad faith cause of action would be available to no-fault plaintiffs under the right set of circumstances. However, this is uncharted territory in the realm of no-fault litigation and its application, if any, remains to be seen.

By David M. Barshay and Jill Lakin Schatz

11 minute read

June 09, 2011 | New York Law Journal

In his No-Fault Insurance Wrap-Up, David M. Barshay, a member of Baker, Sanders, Barshay, Grossman, Fass, Muhlstock and Neuwirth, writes that where a defendant has not established the proper mailing of the denial of claim form, the claim is considered not to have been denied and payment of benefits will therefore be considered to be 'overdue' within the meaning of Insurance Law

By David M. Barshay

9 minute read