December 13, 2019

Comprehensive Care Physical Therapy, P.C. v GEICO Ins. Co. (2019 NY Slip Op 52069(U))

https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/comprehensive-care-physical-therapy-p-c-v-geico-ins-co-2019-ny-slip-op52069u/

Court: Appellate Term, Second Department
Decided: December 13, 2019
Citation: 2019 NY Slip Op 52069(U) · 66 Misc 3d 131(A)
Posture: Summary judgment
Outcome: Insurer prevailed
Issues: EUO no-show

Cite as

Comprehensive Care Physical Therapy, P.C. v GEICO Ins. Co., 66 Misc 3d 131(A), 2019 NY Slip Op 52069(U) (App Term, 2d Dept, 2d, 11th & 13th Jud Dists 2019)

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.

The provider's summary judgment motion was denied and the insurer's cross motion dismissing the complaint for EUO nonappearance was granted. The Appellate Term, Second Department, affirmed for the reasons stated in the companion appeal Omphil Care, Inc. v GEICO Ins. Co., decided the same day, No. 2018-1604 K C.

Reported in New York Official Reports at Comprehensive Care Physical Therapy, P.C. v GEICO Ins. Co. (2019 NY Slip Op 52069(U))

[*1]

Comprehensive Care Physical Therapy, P.C. v GEICO Ins. Co.

2019 NY Slip Op 52069(U) [66 Misc 3d 131(A)]

Decided on December 13, 2019

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This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 December 13, 2019

SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, SECOND DEPARTMENT, 2d, 11th and 13th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS

PRESENT: : MICHAEL L. PESCE, P.J., THOMAS P. ALIOTTA, BERNICE D. SIEGAL, JJ
2018-1811 K C

Comprehensive Care Physical Therapy, P.C., as Assignee of Greenberg, Andrea, Appellant,
against
GEICO Ins. Co., Respondent.

The Rybak Firm, PLLC (Damin J. Toell of counsel), for appellant. Rivkin Radler, LLP (Stuart M. Bodoff of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Sharon Bourne-Clarke, J.), entered June 15, 2018. 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 plaintiff had failed to appear for duly scheduled examinations under oath.

For the reasons stated in Omphil Care, Inc., as Assignee of Small, Shereen v GEICO Ins. Co. (__ Misc 3d ___, 2019 NY Slip Op _____ [appeal No. 2018-1604 K C], decided herewith), the order is affirmed.

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

ENTER:
Paul Kenny
Chief Clerk
Decision Date: December 13, 2019

Similar decisions

Omphil Care, Inc. v GEICO Ins. Co. (2019 NY Slip Op 52065(U))The insurer's summary judgment motion dismissing the complaint for the provider's EUO nonappearance was granted and affirmed.
Comprehensive Care Physical Therapy, P.C. v State-Wide Ins. Co. (2017 NY Slip Op 51448(U))The insurer's affirmation established the provider's failure to appear for EUOs on the five claims at issue on appeal.
Gentlecare Ambulatory Anesthesia Servs. v GEICO Ins. Co. (2019 NY Slip Op 50677(U))The insurer's cross motion for summary judgment based on the provider's EUO nonappearance was granted, and dismissal was affirmed.
ABC Physical Therapy, P.C. v GEICO Ins. Co. (2020 NY Slip Op 51335(U))The insurer's motion for summary judgment dismissing the first cause of action was denied on appeal.
Comprehensive Care Physical Therapy, P.C. v Allstate Ins. Co. (2018 NY Slip Op 50848(U))The insurer failed to establish timely mailing of denials supporting its IME nonappearance and fee schedule defenses.