November 16, 2018

New York Infinity Health Care, LCSW, P.C. v Farmington Cas. Co. (2018 NY Slip Op 51640(U))

Headnote

The insurer's cross motion dismissing claims as exceeding the workers' compensation fee schedule was affirmed on proper mailing proof. The Appellate Term, Second Department, affirmed denial of the provider's summary judgment motion and dismissal of its claims for services rendered before April 1, 2013. It found the denials properly mailed under St. Vincent's Hosp. of Richmond v Government Empls. Ins. Co. and rejected the remaining contention without explanation.

Reported in New York Official Reports at New York Infinity Health Care, LCSW, P.C. v Farmington Cas. Co. (2018 NY Slip Op 51640(U))

[*1]
New York Infinity Health Care, LCSW, P.C. v Farmington Cas. Co.
2018 NY Slip Op 51640(U) [61 Misc 3d 142(A)]
Decided on November 16, 2018
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This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 November 16, 2018
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, SECOND DEPARTMENT, 2d, 11th and 13th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS

PRESENT: : MICHAEL L. PESCE, P.J., THOMAS P. ALIOTTA, DAVID ELLIOT, JJ
2016-1365 K C

New York Infinity Health Care, LCSW, P.C., Doing Business as Mindfulness Psychotherapy Services, LCSW, as Assignee of Marlon St. Bernard, Appellant,

against

Farmington Casualty Company, Respondent.


Kopelevich & Feldsherova, P.C. (David Landfair of counsel), for appellant. Law Office of Aloy O. Ibuzor (Alla Peker of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Steven Z. Mostofsky, J.), entered April 6, 2016. 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 affirmed, with $25 costs.

In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, plaintiff appeals from an order of the Civil Court which denied plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and granted defendant’s cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the amounts plaintiff sought to recover, for services rendered prior to April 1, 2013, were in excess of the workers’ compensation fee schedule.

Contrary to plaintiff’s contention, the proof submitted by defendant was sufficient to establish the proper mailing of the denial of claim forms at issue (see St. Vincent’s Hosp. of Richmond v Government Empls. Ins. Co., 50 AD3d 1123 [2008]). Plaintiff’s remaining contention lacks merit.

Accordingly, the order is affirmed.

PESCE, P.J., ALIOTTA and ELLIOT, JJ., concur.


ENTER:
Paul Kenny
Chief Clerk
Decision Date: November 16, 2018

Cited in this decision

Similar decisions