April 29, 2009
A Plus Med., P.C. v Mercury Cas. Co. (2009 NY Slip Op 50824(U))
Headnote
The Appellate Term, First Department, reviewed an order denying the insurer's motion for summary judgment dismissing a provider's no-fault benefits complaint. The insurer relied on the defense of lack of medical necessity. The court held that the insurer's submissions did not conclusively establish that defense as a matter of law. The order was affirmed.
Reported in New York Official Reports at A Plus Med., P.C. v Mercury Cas. Co. (2009 NY Slip Op 50824(U))
[*1]| A Plus Med., P.C. v Mercury Cas. Co. |
| 2009 NY Slip Op 50824(U) [23 Misc 3d 136(A)] |
| Decided on April 29, 2009 |
| Appellate Term, First 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| This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports. |
APPELLATE TERM OF THE SUPREME COURT, FIRST
DEPARTMENT
PRESENT: McKeon, P.J., Schoenfeld, Heitler, JJ
570671/08.
A Plus Medical, P.C. a/a/o John James,
Plaintiff-Respondent, – –
against
Mercury Casualty Company, Defendant-Appellant.
against
Mercury Casualty Company, Defendant-Appellant.
Defendant appeals from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Bronx County
(Ben R. Barbato, J.), entered August 8, 2008, which denied its motion for summary judgment
dismissing the complaint.
Per Curiam.
Order (Ben R. Barbato, J.), entered August 8, 2008, affirmed, with $10 costs.
We sustain the denial of defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissal of the complaint in this no-fault first party benefits case, since defendant’s submissions did not conclusively establish as a matter of law its defense of lack of medical necessity.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.
I concurI concurI concur