Bronx Acupuncture Therapy, P.C. v. MVAIC

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Bronx Acupuncture Therapy, P.C. v. MVAIC

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedAugust 2, 2019

Docket2019 NYSlipOp 51253(U)

StatusPublished

This text of Bronx Acupuncture Therapy, P.C. v. MVAIC (Bronx Acupuncture Therapy, P.C. v. MVAIC) 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

Bronx Acupuncture Therapy, P.C. v. MVAIC, (N.Y. Ct. App. 2019).

Pincite

Opinion

<div align="center">Bronx Acupuncture Therapy, P.C., as Assignee of Lavar Chisolm, Respondent,

against MVAIC, Appellant. </div>

Marshall & Marshall, PLLC (Jeffrey Kadushin of counsel), for appellant.

Gary Tsirelman, P.C. (Evan Polansky of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal from a judgment of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Devin P. Cohen, J.), entered June 30, 2016. The judgment, after a nonjury trial, awarded plaintiff the principal sum of $1,420.

ORDERED that the judgment is reversed, with $30 costs, and the matter is remitted to the Civil Court for the entry of a judgment in favor of defendant dismissing the complaint.

After a nonjury trial in this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, the Civil Court awarded judgment to plaintiff in the principal sum of $1,420.

"The filing of a timely affidavit providing the MVAIC with notice of intention to file a claim is a condition precedent to the right to apply for payment from [MVAIC]. Compliance with the statutory requirement of timely filing a notice of claim must be established in order to demonstrate that the claimant is a covered person, within the meaning of the statute, entitled to recover no-fault benefits from the MVAIC" (<a href="../2016/2016_51535.htm" target="_blank">Avicenna Med. Arts, P.L.L.C. v MVAIC, 53 Misc 3d 142</a>[A], 2016 NY Slip Op 51535[U], *1 [App Term, 2d Dept, 2d, 11th & 13th Jud Dists 2016] [internal quotation marks and citation omitted]; see Insurance Law 5208 [a] [1], [3]; 5221 [b] [2]). As plaintiff did not establish that such an affidavit had been submitted to MVAIC, plaintiff failed to establish its prima facie case (see Insurance Law 5202 [b]; 5208, 5221 [b] [2]). In light of the foregoing, we reach no other issue.

Accordingly, the judgment is reversed and the matter is remitted to the Civil Court for the entry of a judgment in favor of defendant dismissing the complaint.

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

ENTER:

Paul Kenny

Chief Clerk

Decision Date: August 02, 2019

</form>

</div>

</partyblock>

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

<div align="center">Bronx Acupuncture Therapy, P.C., as Assignee of Lavar Chisolm, Respondent,

against MVAIC, Appellant. </div>

Marshall & Marshall, PLLC (Jeffrey Kadushin of counsel), for appellant.

Gary Tsirelman, P.C. (Evan Polansky of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal from a judgment of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Devin P. Cohen, J.), entered June 30, 2016. The judgment, after a nonjury trial, awarded plaintiff the principal sum of $1,420.

ORDERED that the judgment is reversed, with $30 costs, and the matter is remitted to the Civil Court for the entry of a judgment in favor of defendant dismissing the complaint.

After a nonjury trial in this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, the Civil Court awarded judgment to plaintiff in the principal sum of $1,420.

"The filing of a timely affidavit providing the MVAIC with notice of intention to file a claim is a condition precedent to the right to apply for payment from [MVAIC]. Compliance with the statutory requirement of timely filing a notice of claim must be established in order to demonstrate that the claimant is a covered person, within the meaning of the statute, entitled to recover no-fault benefits from the MVAIC" (<a href="../2016/2016_51535.htm" target="_blank">Avicenna Med. Arts, P.L.L.C. v MVAIC, 53 Misc 3d 142</a>[A], 2016 NY Slip Op 51535[U], *1 [App Term, 2d Dept, 2d, 11th & 13th Jud Dists 2016] [internal quotation marks and citation omitted]; see Insurance Law 5208 [a] [1], [3]; 5221 [b] [2]). As plaintiff did not establish that such an affidavit had been submitted to MVAIC, plaintiff failed to establish its prima facie case (see Insurance Law 5202 [b]; 5208, 5221 [b] [2]). In light of the foregoing, we reach no other issue.

Accordingly, the judgment is reversed and the matter is remitted to the Civil Court for the entry of a judgment in favor of defendant dismissing the complaint.

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

ENTER:

Paul Kenny

Chief Clerk

Decision Date: August 02, 2019

</form>

</div>

</partyblock>

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Bronx Acupuncture Therapy, P.C. v. MVAIC, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bronx-acupuncture-therapy-pc-v-mvaic-nyappterm-2019.