FIVE BORO MEDICAL EQUIPMENT, INC., A/A/O ANTHONY COSTON, plf-res, v. NEW YORK CENTRAL MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY def-app

14-382. FIVE BORO MEDICAL EQUIPMENT, INC., A/A/O ANTHONY COSTON, plf-res, v. NEW YORK CENTRAL MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY def-app — Ordered that the motion is granted to the extent of granting appellant leave to appeal as a poor person. Seymour W. James, Jr., Esq., of the Legal Aid Society, Criminal Appeals Bureau (199 Water Street, 3rd Floor, NY, NY 10038, tel# 212 577-3688) is assigned as counsel for the appellant to prosecute the appeal and to serve without compensation. So Order — Order (Andrea Masley, J.), dated May 22, 2013, insofar as appealed from, modified by granting defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing plaintiff's claims seeking no-fault first-party benefits in the aggregate amount of $1,710.05; as modified, order affirmed, with $10 costs to defendant-appellant.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

14-382. FIVE BORO MEDICAL EQUIPMENT, INC., A/A/O ANTHONY COSTON, plf-res, v. NEW YORK CENTRAL MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY def-app — Ordered that the motion is granted to the extent of granting appellant leave to appeal as a poor person. Seymour W. James, Jr., Esq., of the Legal Aid Society, Criminal Appeals Bureau (199 Water Street, 3rd Floor, NY, NY 10038, tel# 212 577-3688) is assigned as counsel for the appellant to prosecute the appeal and to serve without compensation. So Order — Order (Andrea Masley, J.), dated May 22, 2013, insofar as appealed from, modified by granting defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing plaintiff’s claims seeking no-fault first-party benefits in the aggregate amount of $1,710.05; as modified, order affirmed, with $10 costs to defendant-appellant.

The defendant-insurer made a prima facie showing of entitlement to summary judgment dismissing plaintiff’s no-fault claims in the total sum of $1,710.75, for medical supplies provided to plaintiff’s assignor on June 2, 2011 and June 22, 2011, by establishing its proper and timely mailing of the denial of claim forms at issue herein (see St. Vincent’s Hosp. of Richmond v. Government Empls. Ins. Co., 50 AD3d 1123 [2d Dept 2008]), and submitting a sworn peer review report which set forth a sufficient factual basis and medical rationale for the stated conclusion that the medical supplies provided to the assignor were not medically necessary (see Triangle R. Inc. v. New York Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 32 Misc 3d 143[A], 2011 NY Slip Op 51663[U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2011]). Plaintiff’s opposing submission, consisting of an attorney’s affirmation unaccompanied by any medical evidence or other competent proof, was insufficient to raise a triable issue (see Munoz v. Hollingsworth, 18 AD3d 278, 279 [2005]; CPT Med. Servs., P.C. v. N.Y. Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 18 Misc 3d 87 [2007]). Plaintiff’s objections to the peer review doctor’s qualifications “go to the weight and not the admissibility of her opinion” (Solano v. Ronak Med. Care, 114 AD3d 592 [2014]).

FIVE BORO MEDICAL EQUIPMENT, INC., A/A/O ANTHONY COSTON, plf-res, v. NEW YORK CENTRAL MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY def-app

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to New York Law Journal