St. Barnabas Hospital v. American Transit Insurance

57 A.D.3d 517, 869 N.Y.2d 149
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 2, 2008
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 57 A.D.3d 517 (St. Barnabas Hospital v. American Transit Insurance) 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
St. Barnabas Hospital v. American Transit Insurance, 57 A.D.3d 517, 869 N.Y.2d 149 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Opinion

The plaintiff St. Barnabas Hospital, as assignee of Miguel Jimenez (hereinafter the Hospital), made a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law on the first cause of action to recover no-fault benefits by demonstrating that the prescribed statutory billing forms were mailed to and received by the defendant and that payment was overdue (see Westchester Med. Ctr. v Allstate Ins. Co., 53 AD3d 481 [2008]; Hospital for Joint Diseases v New York Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 44 AD3d [518]*518903, 904 [2007]; New York & Presbyt. Hosp. v Countrywide Ins. Co., 44 AD3d 729, 730 [2007]).

However, in opposition, the defendant raised a triable issue of fact as to whether the Hospital timely complied with the demand for verification (see Mount Sinai Hosp. v Allstate Ins. Co., 25 AD3d 673, 674 [2006]). The defendant was not obligated to pay or deny the claim until all demanded verification was provided by the Hospital (see New York & Presbyt. Hosp. v Allstate Ins. Co., 31 AD3d 512, 513 [2006]; Nyack Hosp. v General Motors Acceptance Corp., 27 AD3d 96, 100-101 [2005], mod on other grounds 8 NY3d 294 [2007]; Central Suffolk Hosp. v New York Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 24 AD3d 492, 493 [2005]).

Accordingly, the Supreme Court correctly denied that branch of the defendant’s cross motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the first cause of action, but should not have granted that branch of the Hospital’s motion which was for summary judgment on the first cause of action. Mastro, J.P., Rivera, Fisher and Eng, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Meridian Psychological Services, PC v. Government Employees Insurance
44 Misc. 3d 650 (Nassau County District Court, 2014)
New York Hospital Medical Center v. QBE Insurance
114 A.D.3d 648 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)
Victory Medical Diagnostics, P.C. v. Nationwide Property & Casualty Insurance
36 Misc. 3d 568 (Nassau County District Court, 2012)
Westchester Medical Center v. Country Wide Insurance
84 A.D.3d 790 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
Westchester Medical Center v. Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance
69 A.D.3d 613 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
Lincoln General Insurance v. Alev Medical Supply Inc.
25 Misc. 3d 1019 (New York District Court, 2009)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
57 A.D.3d 517, 869 N.Y.2d 149, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/st-barnabas-hospital-v-american-transit-insurance-nyappdiv-2008.