Evan H Krinick

November 05, 2015 | New York Law Journal

In his Insurance Fraud column, Evan H. Krinick reviews recent decisions by the U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit and their explorations of how sentencing and restitution should be calculated in insurance fraud cases.

By Evan H. Krinick

11 minute read

September 04, 2015 | New York Law Journal

In his Insurance Fraud column, Evan H. Krinick writes that historically, an insurance company's right to cancel an automobile insurance policy for fraud has been somewhat more limited than a life or property insurance policy where a material misrepresentation was made at procurement. Recently, though, courts have been willing to treat automobile insurance fraud—in particular, no-fault insurance fraud—like other kinds of fraud and, even more recently, like other serious violations of law.

By Evan H. Krinick

10 minute read

September 03, 2015 | New York Law Journal

In his Insurance Fraud column, Evan H. Krinick writes that historically, an insurance company's right to cancel an automobile insurance policy for fraud has been somewhat more limited than a life or property insurance policy where a material misrepresentation was made at procurement. Recently, though, courts have been willing to treat automobile insurance fraud—in particular, no-fault insurance fraud—like other kinds of fraud and, even more recently, like other serious violations of law.

By Evan H. Krinick

10 minute read

August 24, 2015 | New York Law Journal

Evan H. Krinick of Rivkin Radler discusses notable Insurance Law decisions from the recent term of the New York Court of Appeals.

By Evan H. Krinick

14 minute read

August 21, 2015 | New York Law Journal

Evan H. Krinick of Rivkin Radler discusses notable Insurance Law decisions from the recent term of the New York Court of Appeals.

By Evan H. Krinick

14 minute read

July 02, 2015 | New York Law Journal

In his Insurance Fraud column, Evan H. Krinick writes: A decision issued by the New York Court of Appeals early in June extends application of the court-created "preclusion" rule in no-fault insurance cases, which provides that an insurer's failure to timely pay or deny a claim results in an insurer being precluded from interposing a defense against payment of the claim, except where the defense raised is lack of coverage. The opinion has important practical implications for consumers, health care providers, and automobile insurance carriers in the state.

By Evan H. Krinick

10 minute read

July 01, 2015 | New York Law Journal

In his Insurance Fraud column, Evan H. Krinick writes: A decision issued by the New York Court of Appeals early in June extends application of the court-created "preclusion" rule in no-fault insurance cases, which provides that an insurer's failure to timely pay or deny a claim results in an insurer being precluded from interposing a defense against payment of the claim, except where the defense raised is lack of coverage. The opinion has important practical implications for consumers, health care providers, and automobile insurance carriers in the state.

By Evan H. Krinick

10 minute read

May 01, 2015 | New York Law Journal

In his Insurance Fraud column, Evan H. Krinick writes that licensed professionals who commit insurance fraud risk the usual penalties, including potential jail time, as well as the loss of their ability to practice their profession. He reviews recent cases where doctors and lawyers faced such penalties.

By Evan H. Krinick

10 minute read

April 30, 2015 | New York Law Journal

In his Insurance Fraud column, Evan H. Krinick writes that licensed professionals who commit insurance fraud risk the usual penalties, including potential jail time, as well as the loss of their ability to practice their profession. He reviews recent cases where doctors and lawyers faced such penalties.

By Evan H. Krinick

10 minute read

March 06, 2015 | New York Law Journal

In his Insurance Fraud column, Evan H. Krinick explores some of the methods disreputable employers sometimes use to avoid their obligations under New York's Workers' Compensation Law and a recent Third Department decision that illustrates how the courts seek to balance the harm stemming from Workers' Comp fraud to limit burdens being placed on employees.

By Evan H. Krinick

8 minute read