October 5, 2023
Advanced Recovery Equip. & Supplies, LLC v Tri-State Consumer Ins. Co. (2023 NY Slip Op 51239(U))
https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/advanced-recovery-equip-supplies-llc-v-tri-state-consumer-ins-co-2023-ny-slip-op-51239u-2/
- Decided
- October 5, 2023
- Citation
- 2023 NY Slip Op 51239(U)
- Posture
- Article 75 petition
- Outcome
- Provider prevailed
- Legal questions
- Court review of arbitration awards (see the maps)
Posture, outcome, issues and treatment by other decisions are Beynenson Law’s classification. Treatment labels are assigned by a language model reading the citing decision; negative and appeal-history labels are checked by a second reader.
Summary
Editorial summary by Beynenson Law, not part of the court’s decision.
Reported in New York Official Reports at Advanced Recovery Equip. & Supplies, LLC v Tri-State Consumer Ins. Co. (2023 NY Slip Op 51239(U))
[*1]| Advanced Recovery Equip. & Supplies, LLC v Tri-State Consumer Ins. Co. |
| 2023 NY Slip Op 51239(U) |
| Decided on October 5, 2023 |
| Appellate Term, Second Department |
| Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. |
| This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports. |
Decided on October 5, 2023
PRESENT: : JERRY GARGUILO, P.J., ELIZABETH H. EMERSON, BARRY E. WARHIT, JJ
2021-249 N C
against
Tri-State Consumer Insurance Company, Appellant.
Thomas Torto, for appellant. Law Offices of Jonathan B. Seplowe, P.C. (Alan M. Elis of counsel), for respondent.
Appeal from a judgment of the District Court of Nassau County, First District (Robert E. Pipia, J.), entered January 10, 2020. The judgment was entered pursuant to an order of that court dated December 17, 2018, which granted a petition to vacate a master arbitrator’s award dated January 10, 2018 and remitted the matter to the master arbitrator for a new determination.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.
Advanced Recovery Equipment & Supplies, LLC (Advanced) commenced this proceeding pursuant to CPLR 7511 to vacate a master arbitrator’s award, which upheld the award of an arbitrator, denying Advanced’s claims to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits for services rendered on June 11, 2015. The District Court, by order entered January 10, 2020, granted the petition on the ground that the master arbitrator’s award was contrary to settled law and remitted the matter to the master arbitrator for a new determination.
Upon a review of the record, we agree with the District Court’s determination vacating the master arbitrator’s determination, as there was no rational basis to support it (see Matter of Acuhealth Acupuncture, P.C. v Country-Wide Ins. Co.,149 AD3d 828[2017]). Consequently, contrary to the insurer’s contention, the District Court properly granted the petition.
Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.
GARGUILO, P.J., and EMERSON, J., concur.
WARHIT, J., taking no part.
ENTER:
Paul Kenny
Chief Clerk
Decision Date: October 5, 2023
Legal questions
A question of no-fault law this decision rules on, from our Legal Questions pages. Bars count the decisions on the question by year and court, coloured by category; circles are this decision and the decisions on the question it cites or that cite it. Point at a bar or circle for details. The categories and summaries are Beynenson Law’s classification, made by a language model and checked by a second reading.
When does a court vacate, modify or confirm a no-fault arbitrator’s or master arbitrator’s award under CPLR article 75?
This decision: Award vacated or modified because it was irrational, arbitrary and capricious, without evidentiary support or contrary to settled law
Affirmed vacatur of the master arbitrator's award upholding denial of the provider's claims, agreeing it was contrary to settled law and had no rational basis, with remittal for a new determination.
Of the 119 decisions on this question in the Second Department courts and the Court of Appeals, 19 (this one included) are in the same category.
Cited in this decision
A label shows how this decision treated the case it cites.
- Matter of Acuhealth Acupuncture, P.C. v Country-Wide Ins. Co. (2017 NY Slip Op 02785) FollowedAn insurer's fraudulent incorporation defense is not precluded by failure to raise it in a timely denial.
Similar decisions
- Matter of Advanced Orthopaedics PLLC v Unitrin Advantage Ins. Co. (2020 NY Slip Op 51017(U))No-fault arbitration is compulsory, and denial of a petition to vacate a master arbitrator's award requires confirmation of the award.
- Wellness Diagnostic Imaging, P.C. v American Tr. Ins. Co. (2025 NY Slip Op 50628(U))The master arbitrator's award had a rational basis because the parties' stipulation limited the dispute to the assignor's IME appearance.
- 563 Grand Med., P.C. v Progressive Northeastern Ins. Co. (2008 NY Slip Op 50090(U))A no-fault arbitrator may raise any issue the arbitrator deems relevant under 11 NYCRR 65-4.4 (e) and 65-4.5 (o).
- Matter of American Tr. Ins. Co. v Big Apple Pain Mgt., PLLC (2025 NY Slip Op 05948)The insurer's petition to vacate a master arbitrator's award was denied because it failed to establish statutory grounds for vacatur.
- Matter of New Millennium Pain & Spine Medicine, P.C. v Progressive Cas. Ins. Co. (2023 NY Slip Op 05369)An insurer's duties cease upon payment of the contractual limit of its no-fault policy.