Pavlova v. Hartford Ins. Co.
This text of Pavlova v. Hartford Ins. Co. (Pavlova v. Hartford 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.
Opinion
against
Hartford Insurance Company, Respondent.
The Rybak Firm, PLLC (Damin J. Toell of counsel), for appellant. Mackey Butts & Wise, LLP (Joshua E. Mackey of counsel), for respondent.
Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (John J. Kelley, J.), entered November 14, 2016. The order granted defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and denied plaintiff's cross motion for summary judgment.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with $25 costs.
In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, plaintiff appeals from an order of the Civil Court which granted defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that plaintiff had failed to appear for duly scheduled examinations under oath and denied plaintiff's cross motion for summary judgment.
For the reasons stated in Pavlova, as Assignee of George Brathwaite v Hartford Ins. Co. (__ Misc 3d ___, 2019 NY Slip Op _____ [appeal No. 2017-600 K C], decided herewith), the order is affirmed.
PESCE, P.J., ALIOTTA and ELLIOT, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
Paul Kenny
Chief Clerk
Decision Date: May 03, 2019
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Pavlova v. Hartford Ins. Co., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pavlova-v-hartford-ins-co-nyappterm-2019.