In Fordham Med. Pain & Treatment. P.C. v. State Farm, (Sup. Ct. New York County, January 4, 2001), Shafer, J., Index No. 600403, the plaintiff sought to receive payment from a no-fault insurer for treatment provided. The insurance company denied the payments, alleging it did not have to pay because plaintiff was violating BCL 1503 because plaintiff's putative owner/sole shareholder was not actually involved in the management of the corporation. The decision stated that the plaintiff's reliance upon the principle that a party may not use a regulatory violation such as a violation of BCL 1502 as a sword to be misplaced, but then failed to explain why the rule should not be applied.