Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
http://nycourts.law.com/CourtDocumentViewer.asp?view=Document&docID=46989 Judge Mendez PLAINTIFF MEDICAL provider sought to recover for first-party, no-fault benefits. Its assistant office manager testified that patients regularly complete intake forms and sign required documents at their initial visit. The witness however, neither observed the assignor sign the assignment or other documents nor is familiar with the assignor’s signature. Citing Johnson v. Lutz, the court held that an assignment of benefits form was not admissible under the business exception to the hearsay rule as embodied in Civil Practice Law and Rules �4518(a) because the assignee had no duty to report any information. The court also determined that a bill to the assignee, prepared and mailed by a separate entity was inadmissible under the business exception to the hearsay rule. Citing S & M Supply Inc. v. Geico Insurance, the court observed that plaintiff’s witness had no personal knowledge as to how the bill was prepared and when the invoice was mailed.

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free ALM Digital Reader.

Benefits of a Digital Membership:

  • Free access to 3 articles* every 30 days
  • Access to the entire ALM network of websites
  • Unlimited access to the ALM suite of newsletters
  • Build custom alerts on any search topic of your choosing
  • Search by a wide range of topics

*May exclude premium content
Already have an account?


ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2020 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.