• 347-746-6001
  • contact@beynensonlaw.com
Beynenson Law
Beynenson Law
    • No-Fault Collections
    • Billing and Collections
    • Provider Defense
  • How We Work
  • About
    • All Research & Data
    • Search Case Law & Regulations
    • New Decisions
    • Decisions by Court
    • Legal Questions
    • No-Fault Regulations
    • Claim Process & Deadlines
    • Arbitrator Scorecard
    • Arbitration Results by Provider
    • Ask No-Fault AI
  • Contact
  • East Hampton, New York

  • 347-746-6001
  • contact@beynensonlaw.com
    • No-Fault Collections
    • Billing and Collections
    • Provider Defense
  • How We Work
  • About
    • All Research & Data
    • Search Case Law & Regulations
    • New Decisions
    • Decisions by Court
    • Legal Questions
    • No-Fault Regulations
    • Claim Process & Deadlines
    • Arbitrator Scorecard
    • Arbitration Results by Provider
    • Ask No-Fault AI
  • Contact
November 23, 2018

Daily Med. Equip. Distrib. Ctr., Inc. v GEICO Gen. Ins. Co. (2018 NY Slip Op 51691(U))

https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/daily-med-equip-distrib-ctr-inc-v-geico-gen-ins-co-2018-ny-slip-op51691u/

Court
Appellate Term, Second Department
Decided
November 23, 2018
Citation
2018 NY Slip Op 51691(U) · 61 Misc 3d 146(A)
Posture
Trial
Issues
Trial and evidence
Cite as
Daily Med. Equip. Distrib. Ctr., Inc. v GEICO Gen. Ins. Co., 61 Misc 3d 146(A), 2018 NY Slip Op 51691(U) (App Term, 2d Dept, 2d, 11th & 13th Jud Dists 2018)

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 judgment after exclusion of the insurer's expert at a medical-necessity trial was reversed and a new trial ordered. The Civil Court had directed a verdict for the provider. The Appellate Term, Second Department, relied on the companion appeal decided the same day, Nova Chiropractic Servs., P.C. v GEICO Gen. Ins. Co., No. 2016-1054 K C, and remitted for a new trial.

Reported in New York Official Reports at Daily Med. Equip. Distrib. Ctr., Inc. v GEICO Gen. Ins. Co. (2018 NY Slip Op 51691(U))

[*1]
Daily Med. Equip. Distrib. Ctr., Inc. v GEICO Gen. Ins. Co.
2018 NY Slip Op 51691(U) [61 Misc 3d 146(A)]
Decided on November 23, 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 23, 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
2016-1059 K C
Daily Medical Equipment Distribution Center, Inc., as Assignee of Kristina Barbee, Respondent,

against

GEICO General Insurance Company, Appellant.

Law Office of Goldstein & Flecker (Lawrence J. Chanice of counsel), for appellant. Law Offices of Emilia I. Rutigliano, P.C. (Emilia I. Rutigliano of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal from a judgment of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Ingrid Joseph, J.), entered February 3, 2016. The judgment, after a nonjury trial, awarded plaintiff the principal sum of $1,556.96.

ORDERED that the judgment is reversed, with $30 costs, and the matter is remitted to the Civil Court for a new trial.

At a nonjury trial of this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, the sole issue was the medical necessity of the supplies in question. The Civil Court precluded the testimony of defendant’s expert witness and granted plaintiff’s motion for a directed verdict. Defendant appeals from the judgment that was subsequently entered in favor of plaintiff in the principal sum of $1,556.96.

For the reasons stated in Nova Chiropractic Servs., P.C., as Assignee of Miguel A. Vizcaino v GEICO Gen. Ins. Co. (__ Misc 3d ___, 2018 NY Slip Op _____ [appeal No. 2016-1054 K C], decided herewith), the judgment is reversed and the matter is remitted to the Civil Court for a new trial.

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


ENTER:
Paul Kenny
Chief Clerk
Decision Date: November 23, 2018

Similar decisions

  • Nova Chiropractic Servs., P.C. v GEICO Gen. Ins. Co. (2018 NY Slip Op 51689(U))The provider's judgment after exclusion of the insurer's expert at a medical-necessity trial was reversed and a new trial ordered.
  • Complete Chiropractic, P.C. v GEICO Gen. Ins. Co. (2019 NY Slip Op 50684(U))The provider's directed verdict on medical necessity was reversed after the insurer's substitute expert was excluded as hearsay.
  • Main St. Medcare, P.C. v GEICO Gen. Ins. Co. (2019 NY Slip Op 50686(U))The provider's directed verdict on medical necessity was reversed after the insurer's substitute expert was excluded as hearsay.
  • Sharp View Diagnostic Imaging, P.C. v GEICO Gen. Ins. Co. (2018 NY Slip Op 51702(U))The provider's judgment after exclusion of the insurer's expert at a medical-necessity trial was reversed and a new trial ordered.
  • Trimed Med. Supply, Inc. v GEICO Ins. Co. (2017 NY Slip Op 51957(U))An insurer's trial expert may differ from the peer reviewer, but testimony must remain within the original report's denial grounds.
Beynenson Law

No-fault collections for healthcare providers across New York State, with billing available together with collections.

Request a free claims review
About the firm

Contact

  • East Hampton, New York

  • 347-746-6001
  • contact@beynensonlaw.com
  • Contact form

Services

  • No-Fault Collections
  • Billing and Collections
  • Provider Defense

Research & Data

  • All Research & Data
  • Search Case Law & Regulations
  • New Decisions
  • Decisions by Court
  • Legal Questions
  • No-Fault Regulations
  • Claim Process & Deadlines
  • Arbitrator Scorecard
  • Arbitration Results by Provider
  • Ask No-Fault AI

©2026 The Beynenson Law Group, PC. Terms of Use Privacy Policy

Site by khrystev.dev

Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. This website provides general information, not legal advice, and using it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Do not send confidential information through this site.