PropertyCasualtyFocus

  • All Topics
  • Contributors
  • About
  • Contact
  • Subscribe
You are here: Home / Discovery Issues / Proposed Amendments to New York’s Comprehensive Insurance Disclosure Act Would Ease Burden on New York Litigants

Proposed Amendments to New York’s Comprehensive Insurance Disclosure Act Would Ease Burden on New York Litigants

January 28, 2022 by Chael Clark

Balanced Rock Weight Scale

On December 31, 2021, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul signed into law the Comprehensive Insurance Disclosure Act, a sweeping reform to the disclosure obligations formerly required under CPLR 3101(f). As enacted, the Comprehensive Insurance Disclosure Act places restrictive new disclosure requirements on defendants and defense counsel litigating in New York. You can read our prior coverage of the act here.

However, even as she was signing the bill into law, Gov. Hochul suggested that revisions to the act were forthcoming. According to Gov. Hochul’s signed approval memorandum: “I agree with the intent of the bill and have reached an agreement with the Legislature to ensure that the scope of the insurance coverage information that parties must provide is properly tailored for the intended purpose, which is to insure that parties in a litigation are correctly informed about the limits of potential insurance coverage.”

It did not take long for those revisions to arrive. On January 18, 2022, the New York State Senate Rules Committee approved Senate Bill S7882, an amended bill that would substantially reduce the disclosure obligations put into place less than one month ago. The New York State Senate passed the amended bill on January 26, 2022, though it still requires passage by the New York State Assembly and the signature of Gov. Hochul. If it passes Assembly and is signed into law, S7882 will amend the Comprehensive Insurance Disclosure Act in significant ways:

  • The act would no longer apply retroactively. The act’s disclosure obligations would only apply to actions filed on or after December 31, 2021.
  • The deadline to disclose the information required under CPLR 3101(f) would be extended from 60 days to 90 days.
  • With plaintiffs’ agreement, defendants would be able to provide only the declaration pages of applicable policies, rather than copies of the entire policies. Plaintiffs would still be able to later request full copies, however, if they so choose.
  • The policies required to be disclosed would be limited only to those policies that “relate to the claim being litigated.”
  • The obligation to disclose detailed contact information of claims handlers would be reduced. The amended bill would require only the name and email address of the claims handler, and would no longer require that information for third-party administrators.
  • Defendants would no longer need to disclose the lawsuits that have reduced (or may reduce) applicable policy limits, or the amount of attorneys’ fees that have reduced those limits.
  • Only the total limits available under the applicable policies (defined as the “actual funds, after taking into account erosion and any other offsets”) would need to be disclosed.
  • The ongoing obligation to update plaintiffs with new information within 30 days of receipt would be reduced. Updates would now only be required at four specific stages of litigation: (1) when the “note of issue” (a notice to the court that the case is trial-ready) is filed; (2) when entering into formal settlement negotiations overseen by the court; (3) at voluntary mediation; and (4) when the case is called for trial.
  • Applications for insurance would no longer need to be disclosed.
  • The act would not apply to actions brought to recover motor vehicle insurance personal injury protection benefits.

While passage of these amendments would certainly be a welcome relief to defendants, defense counsel, and insurance carriers, there is no guarantee if or when the amendments would become law. Defendants need to be prepared to meet the disclosure obligations set forth in the Comprehensive Insurance Disclosure Act as currently enacted. At present, defendants currently in litigation must provide all of the information required by the revised CPLR 3101(f), and the accompanying certifications required by the newly enacted CPLR 3122-b, by March 1, 2022.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

« Previous Article

Ninth Circuit Affirms Coverage Denial Based on Insured’s Unreasonable Expectations

Next Article »

Fifth Circuit Affirms Finding of No Coverage for Phished Funds Never “Held” by Insured

About Chael Clark

Chael J. Clark is an associate at Carlton Fields in New York. Connect with Chael on LinkedIn.

Related Articles

  1. Sixth Circuit Finds No Coverage for Alleged Losses Related to COVID-19
  2. Cybersecurity Awareness Month: Visits From the Ghosts of Claims Past and Claims Future
  3. When Should an Insurer Deny Coverage? The Second Circuit Provides Guidance on What Constitutes a Reasonable Time by Which to Deny Coverage Under New York Law
Carlton Fields Logo
A blog focused on legal developments in the property-casualty industry by the attorneys of Carlton Fields.

Get Weekly Updates!

Send Me Updates!

Focused Topics

  • Additional Insured
  • Bad Faith
  • Business Interruption
  • Class Action
  • Construction/Builder’s Risk
  • Coronavirus / COVID-19
  • Cybersecurity
  • Declaratory Judgment
  • Duty to Defend
  • Environmental
  • Flood
  • Homeowners
  • Occurrence
  • Pollution/Pollutant
  • Property
  • Regulatory
  • VIEW ALL TOPICS »

Recent Articles

  • Connecticut Federal Court Construes Ambiguous Policy Exclusion in Favor of Coverage, but Rejects Bad Faith Claim
  • Third Circuit Holds Harassment Exclusion Bars Coverage for Sexual Assault Suit Under Pennsylvania Law
  • Tenth Circuit Interprets Excess Policy’s Definition of “Medical Incident” as Applying to the Injuries of One Single Person

Carlton Fields

  • carltonfields.com
  • Practices
  • Industries
  • ExpectFocus Magazine

Related Industries/Practices

  • Insurance
  • Financial Lines Insurance
  • Property & Casualty Insurance
  • Financial Services & Insurance Litigation

About PropertyCasualtyFocus

  • All Topics
  • Contributors
  • About
  • Contact
© 2014–2025 Carlton Fields, P.A. · Carlton Fields practices law in California as Carlton Fields, LLP · All Rights Reserved · Privacy Policy · Disclaimer

Carlton Fields publications should not be construed as legal advice on any specific facts or circumstances. The contents are intended for general information and educational purposes only, and should not be relied on as if it were advice about a particular fact situation. The distribution of this publication is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship with Carlton Fields. This publication may not be quoted or referred to in any other publication or proceeding without the prior written consent of the firm, to be given or withheld at our discretion. To request reprint permission for any of our publications, please contact us. The views set forth herein are the personal views of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the firm. This site may contain hypertext links to information created and maintained by other entities. Carlton Fields does not control or guarantee the accuracy or completeness of this outside information, nor is the inclusion of a link to be intended as an endorsement of those outside sites. This site may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions. Web Design by Espo Digital Marketing