T-Square Medical, Inc. v. Nationwide Life Insurance

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

T-Square Medical, Inc. v. Nationwide Life Insurance

224 A.D.2d 268, 637 N.Y.S.2d 416, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1060

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

DecidedFebruary 13, 1996

StatusPublished

This text of 224 A.D.2d 268 (T-Square Medical, Inc. v. Nationwide Life 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

T-Square Medical, Inc. v. Nationwide Life Insurance, 224 A.D.2d 268, 637 N.Y.S.2d 416, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1060 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (William Davis, J.), entered March 3, 1995, which denied defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint on [269]*269the ground of forum non conveniens, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The action seeks to recover on a health insurance policy issued by defendant insurer in South Carolina to plaintiff health care provider’s assignor, a South Carolina resident to whom plaintiff provided medical services in South Carolina. The parties are both residents of New York; the policy is subject to South Carolina law. Defendant argues against retention of New York jurisdiction, mainly because it would not be able to subpoena the patient, the treating physician and other factual witnesses who are located in South Carolina. The IAS Court rejected this argument, pointing out that ”[t]he only issue is what was the usual and customary rate on each of the invoices [for treatment]”, a matter that "can be proved by documents without necessity of witnesses”. We agree. The case is straightforward and its resolution here should involve no difficulties for a New York resident so compelling as to warrant rejecting another New York resident’s choice of forum (see, Banco Ambrosiano v Artoc Bank & Trust, 62 NY2d 65, 74). Defendant’s other arguments are without merit. Concur — Murphy, P. J., Sullivan, Rubin, Ross and Tom, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (William Davis, J.), entered March 3, 1995, which denied defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint on [269]*269the ground of forum non conveniens, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The action seeks to recover on a health insurance policy issued by defendant insurer in South Carolina to plaintiff health care provider’s assignor, a South Carolina resident to whom plaintiff provided medical services in South Carolina. The parties are both residents of New York; the policy is subject to South Carolina law. Defendant argues against retention of New York jurisdiction, mainly because it would not be able to subpoena the patient, the treating physician and other factual witnesses who are located in South Carolina. The IAS Court rejected this argument, pointing out that ”[t]he only issue is what was the usual and customary rate on each of the invoices [for treatment]”, a matter that "can be proved by documents without necessity of witnesses”. We agree. The case is straightforward and its resolution here should involve no difficulties for a New York resident so compelling as to warrant rejecting another New York resident’s choice of forum (see, Banco Ambrosiano v Artoc Bank & Trust, 62 NY2d 65, 74). Defendant’s other arguments are without merit. Concur — Murphy, P. J., Sullivan, Rubin, Ross and Tom, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

224 A.D.2d 268, 637 N.Y.S.2d 416, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1060, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/t-square-medical-inc-v-nationwide-life-insurance-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack