January 20, 2017

Integral Assist Med., P.C. v Tri-State Consumer Ins. Co. (2017 NY Slip Op 50103(U))

https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/integral-assist-med-p-c-v-tri-state-consumer-ins-co-2017-ny-slip-op50103u/

Court: Appellate Term, Second Department
Decided: January 20, 2017
Citation: 2017 NY Slip Op 50103(U) · 54 Misc 3d 135(A)
Posture: Summary judgment
Outcome: Insurer prevailed
Issues: Other

Cite as

Integral Assist Med., P.C. v Tri-State Consumer Ins. Co., 54 Misc 3d 135(A), 2017 NY Slip Op 50103(U) (App Term, 2d Dept, 9th & 10th 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 motion for summary judgment dismissing the provider's no-fault complaint was granted and affirmed on appeal. The Appellate Term, Second Department, rejected as meritless the provider's argument that the insurer took an adversarial position during claims processing in violation of 11 NYCRR 65-3.2 (b), without explaining its reasoning.

Reported in New York Official Reports at Integral Assist Med., P.C. v Tri-State Consumer Ins. Co. (2017 NY Slip Op 50103(U))

[*1]

Integral Assist Med., P.C. v Tri-State Consumer Ins. Co.

2017 NY Slip Op 50103(U) [54 Misc 3d 135(A)]

Decided on January 20, 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This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 January 20, 2017

SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, SECOND DEPARTMENT, 9th and 10th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS

PRESENT: : MARANO, P.J., GARGUILO and BRANDS, JJ.
2015-1336 S C

Integral Assist Medical, P.C., as Assignee of LEONID BERKOVICH, Appellant,
against
Tri-State Consumer Insurance Company, Respondent.

Appeal from an order of the District Court of Suffolk County, Third District (C. Stephen Hackeling, J.), dated April 30, 2015. The order granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

ORDERED that 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 District Court which granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. There is no merit to plaintiff’s argument on appeal that defendant “clearly took an adversarial position” during claims processing in violation of 11 NYCRR 65-3.2 (b).

Accordingly, the order is affirmed.

Marano, P.J., Garguilo and Brands, JJ., concur.

Decision Date: January 20, 2017

Similar decisions

Integral Med. Supply Corp. v Progressive Ins. Co. (2025 NY Slip Op 50493(U))A material misrepresentation defense concerning a vehicle's garaging location is subject to preclusion for untimely denial.
Harvard Med., P.C. v Tri State Consumers Ins. Co. (2016 NY Slip Op 50860(U))The insurer's summary judgment dismissing the provider's claims on a full-payment fee schedule defense was affirmed.
New York Diagnostic Med. Care, P.C. v GEICO Cas. Ins. Co. (2012 NY Slip Op 52409(U))The provider's billing affidavit failed to establish overdue claims or timely denials that were legally deficient.
Jamhil Med., P.C. v Tri-State Consumer Ins. Co. (2012 NY Slip Op 52049(U))The insurer's motion to vacate an unopposed summary judgment order was denied for failure to show a reasonable excuse.
Prime Diagnostic Med., P.C. v State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. (2016 NY Slip Op 51363(U))The insurer's motion for summary judgment dismissing the provider's assigned no-fault claims was granted and affirmed on appeal.