VE Med. Care, P.C. v. Global Liberty Ins. Co of N.Y.

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

VE Med. Care, P.C. v. Global Liberty Ins. Co of N.Y.

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedFebruary 25, 2019

Docket2019 NYSlipOp 50205(U)

StatusPublished

This text of VE Med. Care, P.C. v. Global Liberty Ins. Co of N.Y. (VE Med. Care, P.C. v. Global Liberty Ins. Co of N.Y.) 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.

Bluebook

VE Med. Care, P.C. v. Global Liberty Ins. Co of N.Y., (N.Y. Ct. App. 2019).

Pincite

Opinion

VE Medical Care, P.C., a/a/o Margoth Raigosa, Plaintiff-Respondent, -

against

Global Liberty Insurance Co of New York, Defendant-Appellant.

Defendant appeals from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County (Mary V. Rosado, J.), dated May 10, 2018, which denied its motion to hold a non party in contempt.

Per Curiam.

Order (Mary V. Rosado, J.), entered May 10, 2018, affirmed, without costs.

Since the alleged contemnor, Jonathan Lewin, the doctor who prepared an IME report more than a decade ago, was not a party to the action and was not personally served with the underlying contempt motion (see Long Is. Trust Co. v Rosenberg, 82 AD2d 591 [1981]; John Sexton & Co. v Law Foods, 108 AD2d 785 [1985], app dismissed 65 NY2d 1024 [1985]), but, instead, was served by overnight mail, and has not appeared and waived any jurisdictional defense (cf. Benson Park Assoc. LLC v. Herman, 93 AD3d 609 [2012]), the motion to punish him in contempt for civil disobedience of a judicial subpoena was properly denied.

In view of our disposition, we have no occasion to entertain the issue of whether the address where the subpoena was served and where the motion papers were mailed was the alleged contemnor's actual business address.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.

I concur I concur I concur
Decision Date: February 25, 2019

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

VE Medical Care, P.C., a/a/o Margoth Raigosa, Plaintiff-Respondent, -

against

Global Liberty Insurance Co of New York, Defendant-Appellant.

Defendant appeals from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County (Mary V. Rosado, J.), dated May 10, 2018, which denied its motion to hold a non party in contempt.

Per Curiam.

Order (Mary V. Rosado, J.), entered May 10, 2018, affirmed, without costs.

Since the alleged contemnor, Jonathan Lewin, the doctor who prepared an IME report more than a decade ago, was not a party to the action and was not personally served with the underlying contempt motion (see Long Is. Trust Co. v Rosenberg, 82 AD2d 591 [1981]; John Sexton & Co. v Law Foods, 108 AD2d 785 [1985], app dismissed 65 NY2d 1024 [1985]), but, instead, was served by overnight mail, and has not appeared and waived any jurisdictional defense (cf. Benson Park Assoc. LLC v. Herman, 93 AD3d 609 [2012]), the motion to punish him in contempt for civil disobedience of a judicial subpoena was properly denied.

In view of our disposition, we have no occasion to entertain the issue of whether the address where the subpoena was served and where the motion papers were mailed was the alleged contemnor's actual business address.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.

I concur I concur I concur
Decision Date: February 25, 2019

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

VE Med. Care, P.C. v. Global Liberty Ins. Co of N.Y., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ve-med-care-pc-v-global-liberty-ins-co-of-ny-nyappterm-2019.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack