Harbor Chiropractic, P.C. v. Travelers Ins. Co.

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Harbor Chiropractic, P.C. v. Travelers Ins. Co.

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedJuly 21, 2017

Docket2017 NYSlipOp 50959(U)

StatusPublished

This text of Harbor Chiropractic, P.C. v. Travelers Ins. Co. (Harbor Chiropractic, P.C. v. Travelers 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

Harbor Chiropractic, P.C. v. Travelers Ins. Co., (N.Y. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

Harbor Chiropractic, P.C., as Assignee of Iwona Wakuluk, Respondent,

against

Travelers Insurance Company, Appellant.

Law Offices of Aloy O. Ibuzor (Miriam Granov, Esq.), for appellant. The Odierno Law Firm, P.C. (Paul A. Bargellini, Esq.), for respondent.

Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County (Jodi Orlow, J.), entered June 26, 2014. The order, insofar as appealed from and as limited by the brief, denied defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

ORDERED that the order, insofar as appealed from, is reversed, with $30 costs, and defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is granted.

In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, defendant moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the action is premature due to plaintiff's failure to provide requested verification. The Civil Court denied defendant's motion but, in effect, limited the issues for trial, pursuant to CPLR 3212 (g), to whether plaintiff properly responded to defendant's verification requests. As limited by its brief, defendant appeals from so much of the order as denied its motion.

Defendant's moving papers demonstrated, prima facie, that it had not received the requested verification. In opposition to the motion, plaintiff did not show that the requested verification had been provided to defendant prior to the commencement of the action. In view of the foregoing, and as plaintiff has not challenged the Civil Court's finding, in effect, that defendant is otherwise entitled to judgment, the order, insofar as appealed from, is reversed, and defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the action is premature is granted.

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

ENTER:
Paul Kenny
Chief Clerk
Decision Date: July 21, 2017

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

Harbor Chiropractic, P.C., as Assignee of Iwona Wakuluk, Respondent,

against

Travelers Insurance Company, Appellant.

Law Offices of Aloy O. Ibuzor (Miriam Granov, Esq.), for appellant. The Odierno Law Firm, P.C. (Paul A. Bargellini, Esq.), for respondent.

Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County (Jodi Orlow, J.), entered June 26, 2014. The order, insofar as appealed from and as limited by the brief, denied defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

ORDERED that the order, insofar as appealed from, is reversed, with $30 costs, and defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is granted.

In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, defendant moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the action is premature due to plaintiff's failure to provide requested verification. The Civil Court denied defendant's motion but, in effect, limited the issues for trial, pursuant to CPLR 3212 (g), to whether plaintiff properly responded to defendant's verification requests. As limited by its brief, defendant appeals from so much of the order as denied its motion.

Defendant's moving papers demonstrated, prima facie, that it had not received the requested verification. In opposition to the motion, plaintiff did not show that the requested verification had been provided to defendant prior to the commencement of the action. In view of the foregoing, and as plaintiff has not challenged the Civil Court's finding, in effect, that defendant is otherwise entitled to judgment, the order, insofar as appealed from, is reversed, and defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the action is premature is granted.

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

ENTER:
Paul Kenny
Chief Clerk
Decision Date: July 21, 2017

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Harbor Chiropractic, P.C. v. Travelers Ins. Co., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/harbor-chiropractic-pc-v-travelers-ins-co-nyappterm-2017.