Gl Acupuncture, P.C. v. Allstate Ins. Co.

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Gl Acupuncture, P.C. v. Allstate Ins. Co.

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedJune 1, 2018

Docket2018 NYSlipOp 50841(U)

StatusPublished

This text of Gl Acupuncture, P.C. v. Allstate Ins. Co. (Gl Acupuncture, P.C. v. Allstate Ins. Co.) 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

Gl Acupuncture, P.C. v. Allstate Ins. Co., (N.Y. Ct. App. 2018).

Pincite

Opinion

GL Acupuncture, P.C., as Assignee of Landarau, Rafael, Appellant,

against

Allstate Insurance Company, Respondent.

The Rybak Firm, PLLC (Damin J. Toell of counsel), for appellant. Robert P. Tusa, for respondent (no brief filed).

Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County (Terrence C. O'Conner, J.), entered September 23, 2015. The order, insofar as appealed from as limited by the brief, granted defendant's cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

ORDERED that the order, insofar as appealed from, is reversed, with $30 costs, and defendant's cross 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, as limited by the brief, from so much of an order of the Civil Court as granted defendant's cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the amounts plaintiff sought to recover, for services rendered prior to April 1, 2013, were in excess of the workers' compensation fee schedule.

Plaintiff correctly argues on appeal that the affidavits submitted by defendant did not sufficiently set forth a standard office practice or procedure that would ensure that the denial of claim form had been timely mailed (see St. Vincent's Hosp. of Richmond v Government Empls. Ins. Co., 50 AD3d 1123 [2008]). As defendant did not demonstrate that it is not precluded from asserting its proffered defense (cf. 11 NYCRR 65-3.8 [g] [1] [ii]), defendant is not entitled to [*2]summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Accordingly, the order, insofar as appealed from, is reversed and defendant's cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is denied.

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

ENTER:
Paul Kenny
Chief Clerk
Decision Date: June 01, 2018

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

GL Acupuncture, P.C., as Assignee of Landarau, Rafael, Appellant,

against

Allstate Insurance Company, Respondent.

The Rybak Firm, PLLC (Damin J. Toell of counsel), for appellant. Robert P. Tusa, for respondent (no brief filed).

Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County (Terrence C. O'Conner, J.), entered September 23, 2015. The order, insofar as appealed from as limited by the brief, granted defendant's cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

ORDERED that the order, insofar as appealed from, is reversed, with $30 costs, and defendant's cross 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, as limited by the brief, from so much of an order of the Civil Court as granted defendant's cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the amounts plaintiff sought to recover, for services rendered prior to April 1, 2013, were in excess of the workers' compensation fee schedule.

Plaintiff correctly argues on appeal that the affidavits submitted by defendant did not sufficiently set forth a standard office practice or procedure that would ensure that the denial of claim form had been timely mailed (see St. Vincent's Hosp. of Richmond v Government Empls. Ins. Co., 50 AD3d 1123 [2008]). As defendant did not demonstrate that it is not precluded from asserting its proffered defense (cf. 11 NYCRR 65-3.8 [g] [1] [ii]), defendant is not entitled to [*2]summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Accordingly, the order, insofar as appealed from, is reversed and defendant's cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is denied.

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

ENTER:
Paul Kenny
Chief Clerk
Decision Date: June 01, 2018

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Gl Acupuncture, P.C. v. Allstate Ins. Co., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gl-acupuncture-pc-v-allstate-ins-co-nyappterm-2018.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack