1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |New York Legislation Requiring Disclosure of Insurance Information Likely to Change

New York Legislation Requiring Disclosure of Insurance Information Likely to Change

Client Alert | 1 min read | 01.07.22

Yesterday, we reported on New York’s recently enacted Comprehensive Insurance Disclosure Act, signed into law by Governor Kathy Hochul. We note that the Governor’s agreement to sign the legislation was accompanied by an approval memorandum, which explained that Governor Hochul signed the legislation based on “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.” 

While the details are still being worked out and final language is not yet available, the agreement between the Legislature and the Governor, on which the law was premised, will narrow the insurance information that defendants will have to provide. In addition, we understand that the legislation will apply prospectively only to lawsuits filed after January 1, 2022, and not to actions that were already pending when the legislation went into effect on December 31, 2021. 

With the understanding that the new insurance information requirements will apply only to actions filed after January 1, 2022, we expect that more information about the parameters of the requirements will be available before the deadlines arrive for compliance with the new law. Specifically, since a defendant has 20 days to answer or otherwise respond to a complaint under New York civil procedure rules, and the information is required within 60 days of a policyholder’s answer being filed, the earliest possible date on which the disclosures would be required is approximately March 25, 2022. By that time, we hope the precise scope of the insurance information that must be provided in order to comply with the new law will be established. Crowell & Moring LLP will continue to monitor developments, and will update you as those details become available.

Contacts

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....

View All Insights