Active Care Med. Supply Corp. v. Metlife Auto & Home

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York
DecidedMay 25, 2018
Docket2018 NYSlipOp 50772(U)
StatusPublished

This text of Active Care Med. Supply Corp. v. Metlife Auto & Home (Active Care Med. Supply Corp. v. Metlife Auto & Home) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Active Care Med. Supply Corp. v. Metlife Auto & Home, (N.Y. Ct. App. 2018).

Opinion



Active Care Medical Supply Corp., as Assignee of Simmons, Joseph, Appellant,

against

Metlife Auto & Home, Respondent.


The Rybak Firm, PLLC (Damin J. Toell of counsel), for appellant. Bruno, Gerbino & Soriano, LLP (Mitchell L. Kaufman and Nathan Shapiro of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Reginald A. Boddie, J.), entered September 9, 2015. The order granted defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

ORDERED that the order is reversed, with $30 costs, and defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is denied.

In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, plaintiff appeals from an order of the Civil Court which granted defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that plaintiff's assignor had failed to appear for duly scheduled examinations under oath (EUOs).

Plaintiff correctly argues on appeal that defendant failed to submit proof by someone with personal knowledge of plaintiff's assignor's nonappearance at an initial and follow-up EUO (see Stephen Fogel Psychological, P.C. v Progressive Cas. Ins. Co., 35 AD3d 720 [2006]).

Accordingly, the order is reversed and defendant's motion for summary judgment [*2]dismissing the complaint is denied.

PESCE, P.J., ALIOTTA and ELLIOT, JJ., concur.


ENTER:
Paul Kenny
Chief Clerk
Decision Date: May 25, 2018

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Stephen Fogel Psychological, P.C. v. Progressive Casualty Insurance
35 A.D.3d 720 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Active Care Med. Supply Corp. v. Metlife Auto & Home, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/active-care-med-supply-corp-v-metlife-auto-home-nyappterm-2018.