Panagakos v. Oxford Health Plans, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Panagakos v. Oxford Health Plans, Inc.

7 A.D.3d 771, 776 N.Y.S.2d 880

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMay 24, 2004

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 7 A.D.3d 771 (Panagakos v. Oxford Health Plans, Inc.) 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

Panagakos v. Oxford Health Plans, Inc., 7 A.D.3d 771, 776 N.Y.S.2d 880 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for fraud, the plaintiff appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (DiBlasi, J), entered December 20, 2002, as granted that branch of the defendants’ motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the third cause of action to recover damages for fraud.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

“The essential elements of a cause of action for fraud are ‘representation of a material existing fact, falsity, scienter, deception and injury’ ” (New York Univ. v Continental Ins. Co., 87 NY2d 308, 318 [1995], quoting Channel Master Corp. v Aluminium Ltd. Sales, 4 NY2d 403, 407 [1958] [emphasis supplied]). In response to the defendants’ prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law (see Winegrad v New York Univ. Med. Ctr., 64 NY2d 851, 852 [1985]), the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether the defendants falsely represented the coverage she would receive under the “Oxford Medicare Advantage” plan. Therefore, the defendants were entitled to summary judgment dismissing the third cause of action to recover damages for fraud.

In light of our determination, we do not reach the remaining contentions. Florio, J.P., Krausman, Cozier and Rivera, JJ., concur.

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

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for fraud, the plaintiff appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (DiBlasi, J), entered December 20, 2002, as granted that branch of the defendants’ motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the third cause of action to recover damages for fraud.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

“The essential elements of a cause of action for fraud are ‘representation of a material existing fact, falsity, scienter, deception and injury’ ” (New York Univ. v Continental Ins. Co., 87 NY2d 308, 318 [1995], quoting Channel Master Corp. v Aluminium Ltd. Sales, 4 NY2d 403, 407 [1958] [emphasis supplied]). In response to the defendants’ prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law (see Winegrad v New York Univ. Med. Ctr., 64 NY2d 851, 852 [1985]), the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether the defendants falsely represented the coverage she would receive under the “Oxford Medicare Advantage” plan. Therefore, the defendants were entitled to summary judgment dismissing the third cause of action to recover damages for fraud.

In light of our determination, we do not reach the remaining contentions. Florio, J.P., Krausman, Cozier and Rivera, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

7 A.D.3d 771, 776 N.Y.S.2d 880, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/panagakos-v-oxford-health-plans-inc-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack