April 25, 2012

Alfa Med. Supplies v Geico Gen. Ins. Co. (2012 NY Slip Op 50762(U))

Headnote

The court considered a case in which Alfa Medical Supplies, as the assignee of Teresa D. Cortez, appealed from an order dismissing the complaint against Geico General Insurance Company. The main issue was whether defendant had timely denied plaintiff's claims for first-party no-fault benefits. The court affirmed the judgment, holding that the affidavit of defendant's claim representative was sufficient to establish that the claims had been timely denied, and since this was the sole issue raised on appeal, the judgment was affirmed.

Reported in New York Official Reports at Alfa Med. Supplies v Geico Gen. Ins. Co. (2012 NY Slip Op 50762(U))

Alfa Med. Supplies v Geico Gen. Ins. Co. (2012 NY Slip Op 50762(U)) [*1]

Alfa Med. Supplies v Geico Gen. Ins. Co.

2012 NY Slip Op 50762(U) [35 Misc 3d 134(A)]

Decided on April 25, 2012

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This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 April 25, 2012

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

PRESENT: : PESCE, P.J., RIOS and ALIOTTA, JJ
.

Alfa Medical Supplies as Assignee of TERESA D. CORTEZ, Appellant, —
against
Geico General Ins. Co., Respondent.

Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Katherine Levine, J.), entered May 24, 2010, deemed from a judgment of the same court entered October 19, 2010 (see CPLR 5512 [a]; Neuman v Otto, 114 AD2d 791 [1985]). The judgment, entered pursuant to the May 24, 2010 order denying plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and granting defendant’s cross motion for summary judgment, dismissed the complaint.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.

In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, the Civil Court denied plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and granted defendant’s cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. After judgment was entered, plaintiff appealed from the order. We deem plaintiff’s appeal to be from the judgment (see CPLR 5512 [a]; Neuman v Otto, 114 AD2d 791 [1985]).

Contrary to plaintiff’s contention, the affidavit of defendant’s claim representative was sufficient to establish that defendant had timely denied plaintiff’s claims (see St. Vincent’s Hosp. of Richmond v Government Empls. Ins. Co., 50 AD3d 1123 [2008]; Delta Diagnostic Radiology, P.C. v Chubb Group of Ins., 17 Misc 3d 16 [App Term, 2d & 11th Jud Dists 2007]). As this is the sole issue raised on appeal by plaintiff, the judgment is affirmed.

Pesce, P.J., Rios and Aliotta, JJ., concur.
Decision Date: April 25, 2012