June 20, 2016

ALFA Med. Supplies, Inc. v Allstate Ins. Co. (2016 NY Slip Op 50942(U))

https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/alfa-med-supplies-inc-v-allstate-ins-co-2016-ny-slip-op50942u/

Court: Appellate Term, First Department
Decided: June 20, 2016
Citation: 2016 NY Slip Op 50942(U) · 52 Misc 3d 129(A)
Posture: Default or vacatur
Outcome: Provider prevailed
Issues: Defaults and vacatur
Legal questions: Vacating a default: excuse and defense (see the maps)

Cite as

ALFA Med. Supplies, Inc. v Allstate Ins. Co., 52 Misc 3d 129(A), 2016 NY Slip Op 50942(U) (App Term, 1st Dept 2016)

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 failed to provide a reasonable excuse for its two-year delay in answering because its affidavit lacked personal knowledge. The claims representative stated that the insurer's computer system contained no record of the summons and complaint, but worked at a different office and did not demonstrate knowledge of the procedures for handling process at the office that received it. The affidavit therefore did not establish that clerical error caused the papers to be overlooked. The Appellate Term, First Department, reversed the order granting vacatur, denied the insurer's motion, and reinstated the provider's default judgment. Without a reasonable excuse, the court did not reach the existence of a meritorious defense.

Reported in New York Official Reports at ALFA Med. Supplies, Inc. v Allstate Ins. Co. (2016 NY Slip Op 50942(U))

[*1]

ALFA Med. Supplies, Inc. v Allstate Ins. Co.

2016 NY Slip Op 50942(U) [52 Misc 3d 129(A)]

Decided on June 20, 2016

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This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.

Decided on June 20, 2016

SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, FIRST DEPARTMENT
PRESENT: Hunter, Jr., J.P, Lowe, III, Ling-Cohan, JJ.
570085/16

ALFA Medical Supplies, Inc., a/a/o Juan Vargas, Plaintiff-Appellant,
against
Allstate Ins. Co., Defendant-Respondent.

Plaintiff appeals from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County (Michael L. Katz, J.), entered May 14, 2015, which granted defendant’s motion to vacate a default judgment.

Per Curiam.

Order (Michael L. Katz, J.), entered May 14, 2015, reversed, with $10 costs, motion denied and default judgment reinstated.

Defendant-insurer failed to offer a reasonable excuse to adequately explain its two-year delay in answering the complaint in this action seeking to recover first-party no-fault benefits. The affidavit of defendant’s claim representative, who was employed in defendant’s office in Hauppauge, New York, averred that there was no record of the summons and complaint in defendant’s computer system. However, the affiant failed to demonstrate personal knowledge of the office procedures put in place by defendant in connection with the handling of a summons and complaint received at defendant’s office in Lake Success, New York (see Westchester Med. Ctr. v Philadelphia Indem. Ins. Co., 69 AD3d 613 [2010]; Medcare Supply, Inc. v Farmers New Century Ins. Co., 45 Misc 3d 135[A], 2014 NY Slip Op 51752[U][App Term, 1st Dept. 2014]). “Thus, that affidavit was insufficient to show that the failure to timely appear and answer was due to a clerical error which caused the summons and complaint to be overlooked” (Westchester Med. Ctr., 69 AD3d at 614). Accordingly, there is no need to reach the issue of meritorious defense (see Uram v Smith, 138 AD3d 553 [2016]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.

I concur I concur I concur
Decision Date: June 20, 2016

Legal questions

A question of no-fault law this decision rules on, from our Legal Questions pages. Bars count the decisions on the question by year and court, coloured by category; circles are this decision and the decisions on the question it cites or that cite it. Point at a bar or circle for details. The categories and summaries are Beynenson Law’s classification, made by a language model and checked by a second reading.

Vacating a default: excuse and defense

Open the full map

Did the defaulting party show a reasonable excuse (or lack of notice) and a potentially meritorious defense or claim?

This decision: Relief denied because no reasonable excuse (or, under CPLR 317, no lack of actual notice) was shown; meritorious defense accepted or not reached

Reinstated the default judgment because the claim representative's no-record affidavit lacked personal knowledge of the procedures at the office that received process, so it showed no reasonable excuse for the two-year delay in answering.

Default excusedNo reasonable excuseNo meritorious defenseNeither shownThis decision

Of the 12 decisions on this question in the First Department courts and the Court of Appeals, 3 (this one included) are in the same category. One decision in other departments that cites or is cited by this one is on the full map.

Cited in this decision

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

Westchester Med. Ctr. v Philadelphia Indem. Ins. Co. (2010 NY Slip Op 00138) FollowedThe insurer failed to justify vacating its default because its affidavit established neither a reasonable excuse nor a meritorious defense.
Medcare Supply, Inc. v Farmers New Century Ins. Co. (2014 NY Slip Op 51752(U)) FollowedThe insurer failed to establish untimely receipt of the provider's claim, and a stamped mailing certificate raised a factual issue.

Similar decisions

A.B. Med. Servs. PLLC v Allstate Ins. Co. (2006 NY Slip Op 50243(U))The insurer failed to establish a reasonable excuse for its default or a meritorious defense to the providers' claims.
Amaze Med. Supply v Allstate Ins. Co. (2004 NY Slip Op 50263(U))The insurer failed to justify vacating its default because it established neither a reasonable excuse nor a meritorious defense.
Prompt Med. Supply, Inc. v State Farm Mut. Auto Ins. Co. (2019 NY Slip Op 50503(U))The insurer's default was excused based on possible withdrawal and the provider's assurance that no default proceedings would be commenced.
Alfa Med. Supplies v Geico Gen. Ins. Co. (2012 NY Slip Op 50762(U))The insurer's summary judgment dismissal was upheld because its claim representative's affidavit sufficiently established timely denials.
Bayshore Chiropractic, P.C. v Allstate Ins. Co. (2017 NY Slip Op 51121(U))The insurer's explanation of law office failure during a file transfer showed attorney neglect and did not reasonably excuse its default.