New York Department Investigating Life, Disability, and Long-term Care Insurers for Alleged Discrimination
Client Alert | 1 min read | 02.16.18
Following a report in the New York Times, the New York Department of Financial Services announced February 14 that it will investigate assertions that life and disability insurers writing in New York denied coverage to persons taking an anti-HIV drug, Truvada, as a means of preventing the onset of AIDS. The Superintendent of DFS stated that such denials would be considered evidence of illegal discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.
Section 4224 of the New York Insurance Law prohibits “unfair discrimination” by life and health insurers and where sound actuarial justification for such discrimination is absent. Section 63(12) of the New York Executive Law empowers the Attorney General to seek injunctive relief, and restitution and damages, against any business engaged in repeated illegal acts.
Clients writing life, disability, and long-term care policies in New York are subject to being examined by the Department and investigated by the New York Attorney General for potential discriminatory denials of coverage to persons taking Truvada. Those clients may find it advisable to undertake immediate steps to completely retain and comprehensively review their underwriting records, including all relevant e-mails and inter-company communications, to determine the extent to which such denials of coverage occurred.
For further information please contact Senior Counsel Richard Liskov, a former Deputy Superintendent and General Counsel of the New York Insurance Department, at rliskov@crowell.com.
Insights
Client Alert | 5 min read | 12.12.25
Eleventh Circuit Hears Argument on False Claims Act Qui Tam Constitutionality
On the morning of December 12, 2025, the Eleventh Circuit heard argument in United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Florida Medical Associates, LLC, et al., No. 24-13581 (11th Cir. 2025). This case concerns the constitutionality of the False Claims Act (FCA) qui tam provisions and a groundbreaking September 2024 opinion in which the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida held that the FCA’s qui tam provisions were unconstitutional under Article II. See United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Fla. Med. Assocs., LLC, 751 F. Supp. 3d 1293 (M.D. Fla. 2024). That decision, penned by District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle, was the first success story for a legal theory that has been gaining steam ever since Justices Thomas, Barrett, and Kavanaugh indicated they would be willing to consider arguments about the constitutionality of the qui tam provisions in U.S. ex rel. Polansky v. Exec. Health Res., 599 U.S. 419 (2023). In her opinion, Judge Mizelle held (1) qui tam relators are officers of the U.S. who must be appointed under the Appointments Clause; and (2) historical practice treating qui tam and similar relators as less than “officers” for constitutional purposes was not enough to save the qui tam provisions from the fundamental Article II infirmity the court identified. That ruling was appealed and, after full briefing, including by the government and a bevy of amici, the litigants stepped up to the plate this morning for oral argument.
Client Alert | 8 min read | 12.11.25
Director Squires Revamps the Workings of the U.S. Patent Office
Client Alert | 8 min read | 12.10.25
Creativity You Can Use: CJEU Clarifies Copyright for Applied Art
Client Alert | 4 min read | 12.10.25
Federal Court Strikes Down Interior Order Suspending Wind Energy Development
