• 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
February 8, 2017

Pavlova v Country Wide Ins. Co. (2017 NY Slip Op 50209(U))

https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/pavlova-v-country-wide-ins-co-2017-ny-slip-op-50209u/

Court
Appellate Term, Second Department
Decided
February 8, 2017
Citation
2017 NY Slip Op 50209(U) · 54 Misc 3d 143(A)
Posture
Summary judgment
Outcome
Split result
Issues
Other
Cite as
Pavlova v Country Wide Ins. Co., 54 Misc 3d 143(A), 2017 NY Slip Op 50209(U) (App Term, 2d Dept, 2d, 11th & 13th Jud Dists 2017)

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 insurer's summary judgment cross motion was denied on appeal, while denial of the provider's summary judgment motion remained in place. The Appellate Term, Second Department, modified the order for the reasons stated in Island Life Chiropractic Pain Care, PLLC v Country Wide Ins. Co., and otherwise affirmed, leaving both sides without summary judgment.

Reported in New York Official Reports at Pavlova v Country Wide Ins. Co. (2017 NY Slip Op 50209(U))

[*1]
Pavlova v Country Wide Ins. Co.
2017 NY Slip Op 50209(U) [54 Misc 3d 143(A)]
Decided on February 8, 2017
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This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 February 8, 2017

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


PRESENT: : WESTON, J.P., ALIOTTA and ELLIOT, JJ.
2015-1947 Q C
Ksenia Pavlova, D.O., as Assignee of Connie Stevenson, Appellant,

against

Country Wide Insurance Company, Respondent.

Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County (Larry Love, J.), entered June 29, 2015. 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 modified by providing that defendant’s cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is denied; as so modified, the order is affirmed, without 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.

For the reasons stated in Island Life Chiropractic Pain Care, PLLC v Country Wide Ins. Co. (53 Misc 3d 131[A], 2016 NY Slip Op 51378[U] [App Term, 2d Dept, 2d, 11th & 13th Jud Dists 2016]), the order is modified by providing that defendant’s cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is denied.

Weston, J.P., Aliotta and Elliot, JJ., concur.


Decision Date: February 08, 2017

Cited in this decision

A label shows how this decision treated the case it cites.

  • Island Life Chiropractic, P.C. v Country Wide Ins. Co. (2016 NY Slip Op 51378(U)) FollowedThe insurer failed to prove mailing of a cancellation notice, and conflicting affidavits raised a factual issue over claim submission.

Similar decisions

  • Pavlova v State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. (2018 NY Slip Op 51634(U))The insurer's summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the provider's EUO nonappearance was affirmed.
  • Pavlova v Hartford Ins. Co. (2019 NY Slip Op 50697(U))The insurer's motion for summary judgment based on the provider's failure to attend duly scheduled EUOs was granted and affirmed on appeal.
  • Pavlova v Travelers Ins. Co. (2018 NY Slip Op 51778(U))The provider's verification-mailing affidavit raised a factual issue as to whether its no-fault action was premature.
  • Pavlova v 21st Century Ins. Co. (2022 NY Slip Op 50363(U))The insurer failed to establish a timely denial after the assignor's alleged failure to appear for an initial and a follow-up EUO. It therefore did not demonstrate that its EUO defense was free from preclusion, and summary judgment dismissing the complaint should have been denied.
  • Pavlova v Nationwide Ins. (2019 NY Slip Op 52056(U))The provider's motion to vacate default summary judgment dismissing its complaint was denied for lack of a reasonable excuse.
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.