TAM Med. Supply Corp. v. National Liab. & Fire Ins. Co.

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York·Decided October 11, 2016·No. 2016 NYSlipOp 51506(U)·Published

Opinion



TAM Medical Supply Corp., as Assignee of Shameca Dudley, Appellant,

against

National Liability & Fire Insurance Company, Respondent.


Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County (Jodi Orlow, J.), entered December 18, 2013. The order denied plaintiff's motion for summary judgment and granted defendant's cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

ORDERED that the order is modified by providing that defendant's cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is denied; as so modified, the order is affirmed, without costs.

In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, by order entered December 18, 2013, the Civil Court denied plaintiff's motion for summary judgment, and granted defendant's cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the action was premature because plaintiff had failed to provide requested verification.

In support of its cross motion, defendant established that it had timely mailed its verification request and follow-up verification request (see St. Vincent's Hosp. of Richmond v Government Empls. Ins. Co., 50 AD3d 1123 [2008]). Defendant also demonstrated prima facie that it had not received the requested verification and, thus, that plaintiff's action is premature (see Central Suffolk Hosp. v New York Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 24 AD3d 492 [2005]). However, in opposition to the cross motion, plaintiff submitted an affidavit from plaintiff's owner, which affidavit was sufficient to give rise to a presumption that the requested verification had been mailed to, and received by, defendant (see Residential Holding Corp. v Scottsdale Ins. Co., 286 AD2d 679 [2001]). In light of the foregoing, there is a triable issue of fact as to whether this action is premature (see Compas Med., P.C. v Praetorian Ins. Co., 49 Misc 3d 152[A], 2015 NY Slip Op 57776[U] [App Term, 2d Dept, 2d, 11th & 13th Jud Dists 2015]).

Accordingly, the order is modified by providing that defendant's cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is denied.

Pesce, P.J., Aliotta and Solomon, JJ., concur.


Decision Date: October 11, 2016

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

TAM Med. Supply Corp. v. National Liab. & Fire Ins. Co., (N.Y. Ct. App. 2016).

TAM Med. Supply Corp. v. National Liab. & Fire Ins. Co. (TAM Med. Supply Corp. v. National Liab. & Fire Ins. Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Central Suffolk Hospital v. New York Central Mutual Fire Insurance
24 A.D.3d 492 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2005)
St. Vincent's Hospital v. Government Employees Insurance
50 A.D.3d 1123 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)
Residential Holding Corp. v. Scottsdale Insurance
286 A.D.2d 679 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)