February 5, 2016

Advanced Med. Care, P.C. v Allstate Ins. Co. (2016 NY Slip Op 50130(U))

Headnote

The court considered an appeal from an order of the District Court which denied the defendant's motion for summary judgment in a case where a medical care provider was seeking to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits from an insurance company. The main issue decided by the court was whether the insurance policy had been effectively terminated, as the defendant claimed, and whether this termination was effective with respect to the plaintiff's assignor. The court held that the defendant failed to sufficiently demonstrate that it had filed a copy of the notice of termination of the insurance policy with the Department of Motor Vehicles within 30 days of the effective date of the termination, as required by Vehicle and Traffic Law, and therefore the termination was not effective with respect to the plaintiff's assignor. Consequently, the defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint was properly denied and the order was affirmed.

Reported in New York Official Reports at Advanced Med. Care, P.C. v Allstate Ins. Co. (2016 NY Slip Op 50130(U))

Advanced Med. Care, P.C. v Allstate Ins. Co. (2016 NY Slip Op 50130(U)) [*1]

Advanced Med. Care, P.C. v Allstate Ins. Co.

2016 NY Slip Op 50130(U) [50 Misc 3d 137(A)]

Decided on February 5, 2016

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This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 5, 2016

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

PRESENT: : MARANO, P.J., IANNACCI and GARGUILO, JJ.
2013-1810 N C

Advanced Medical Care, P.C. as Assignee of JEAN ADOLPHE, Respondent,
against
Allstate Insurance Company, Appellant.

Appeal from an order of the District Court of Nassau County, First District (Fred J. Hirsh, J.), dated July 8, 2013. The order denied 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, defendant appeals from an order of the District Court which denied defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

While defendant’s motion was based on its alleged termination of the insurance policy in question, defendant failed to sufficiently demonstrate, as a matter of law, that it had filed a copy of the notice of termination of the insurance policy with the Department of Motor Vehicles within 30 days of the effective date of the termination, as required by Vehicle and Traffic Law § 313 (2) (a) (see Matter of Progressive Classic Ins. Co. v Kitchen, 46 AD3d 333 [2007]). Therefore, defendant has not established that the termination of the insurance policy was effective with respect to plaintiff’s assignor, who was not the named insured and who was not shown to be a member of the named insured’s household (see Vehicle and Traffic Law § 313 [3]; GL Acupuncture, P.C. v Geico Ins. Co., 48 Misc 3d 141[A], 2015 NY Slip Op 51239[U] [App Term, 2d Dept, 2d, 11th & 13th Jud Dists 2015]). Consequently, defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint was properly denied.

Accordingly, the order is affirmed.

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

Decision Date: February 05, 2016