Country-Wide Ins. Co. v. TC Acupuncture, P.C.

140 A.D.3d 643, 33 N.Y.S.3d 713
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJune 28, 2016
Docket1620N 652429/15
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 140 A.D.3d 643 (Country-Wide Ins. Co. v. TC Acupuncture, P.C.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Country-Wide Ins. Co. v. TC Acupuncture, P.C., 140 A.D.3d 643, 33 N.Y.S.3d 713 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2016).

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Geoffrey D. Wright, J.), entered October 23, 2015, which granted petitioner’s motion to vacate a master arbitrator’s award in favor of respondent, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, the motion denied, and the award confirmed. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly.

Respondent commenced an arbitration against petitioner insurance company for reimbursement of bills for alleged health care services rendered by respondent to Alexander Oneal. Petitioner, relying on State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v Mallela (4 NY3d 313 [2005]), asserted that it could withhold payment because respondent was fraudulently incorporated. After a hearing, an arbitrator awarded respondent full reimbursement, and found that petitioner failed to meet its burden of providing clear and convincing evidence showing that respondent was fraudulently incorporated. On appeal, the master arbitrator affirmed the arbitration award and rejected petitioner’s argument that its burden of proof on its Mallela defense should have been preponderance of the evidence.

Supreme Court erred in vacating the master arbitrator’s award on the ground that the master arbitrator mistakenly applied the wrong burden of proof to petitioner’s Mallela defense. Even assuming, without deciding, that the master arbitrator *644 applied the wrong burden of proof, the award is not subject to vacatur on that ground (Matter of New York State Correctional Officers & Police Benevolent Assn. v State of New York, 94 NY2d 321, 326 [1999]). Nor is there any other basis for vacating the award (see id.’, see also CPLR 7511 [b] [1]).

Concur — Friedman, J.P., Saxe, Richter and Kahn, JJ.

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

Related

Matter of Country-Wide Ins. Co. v. TC Acupuncture, P.C.
2021 NY Slip Op 01120 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2021)
Matter of Country-Wide Ins. Co. v. Bay Needle Care Acupuncture, P.C.
2018 NY Slip Op 3929 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
140 A.D.3d 643, 33 N.Y.S.3d 713, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/country-wide-ins-co-v-tc-acupuncture-pc-nyappdiv-2016.