Biette v. Baxter

New York Court of Appeals

Biette v. Baxter

440 N.E.2d 534, 57 N.Y.2d 698, 454 N.Y.S.2d 535, 1982 N.Y. LEXIS 3623

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedSeptember 2, 1982

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 440 N.E.2d 534 (Biette v. Baxter) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Biette v. Baxter, 440 N.E.2d 534, 57 N.Y.2d 698, 454 N.Y.S.2d 535, 1982 N.Y. LEXIS 3623 (N.Y. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

On review of submissions pursuant to rule 500.2 (b) of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.2 [b]), the order of the Appellate Division should be reversed, with costs, the motion to vacate the lien denied and the question certified answered in the affirmative.

A no-fault insurer which pays first-party benefits to a covered person injured through the use or operation of a motor vehicle has a lien for medical expenses and lost wages against a recovery from the manufacturer of a defective prosthetic device installed as a result of the injury. Though not a joint tort-feasor the manufacturer is a noncovered person whose product aggravated the personal injury for which the insurer was required to pay first-party benefits and, under the provisions of subdivision 2 of section 673 of the Insurance Law, the insurer, therefore, has a lien for such payments against any recovery from the manufacturer (Aetna Ins. Co. v Springsteen, 78 AD2d 532).

[700]*700Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur in memorandum; Judge Gabrielli taking no part.

On review of submissions pursuant to rule 500.2 (b), order reversed, etc.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

On review of submissions pursuant to rule 500.2 (b) of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.2 [b]), the order of the Appellate Division should be reversed, with costs, the motion to vacate the lien denied and the question certified answered in the affirmative.

A no-fault insurer which pays first-party benefits to a covered person injured through the use or operation of a motor vehicle has a lien for medical expenses and lost wages against a recovery from the manufacturer of a defective prosthetic device installed as a result of the injury. Though not a joint tort-feasor the manufacturer is a noncovered person whose product aggravated the personal injury for which the insurer was required to pay first-party benefits and, under the provisions of subdivision 2 of section 673 of the Insurance Law, the insurer, therefore, has a lien for such payments against any recovery from the manufacturer (Aetna Ins. Co. v Springsteen, 78 AD2d 532).

[700]*700Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur in memorandum; Judge Gabrielli taking no part.

On review of submissions pursuant to rule 500.2 (b), order reversed, etc.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

440 N.E.2d 534, 57 N.Y.2d 698, 454 N.Y.S.2d 535, 1982 N.Y. LEXIS 3623, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/biette-v-baxter-ny-1982.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack