February 15, 2022

American Tr. Ins. Co. v Martinez (2022 NY Slip Op 00963)

Headnote

The main issue in this case was whether the insurance company was required to honor or pay any claims from certain medical facilities and providers in connection with two separate accidents that occurred on May 22, 2018 and June 11, 2018, respectively. The court considered the fact that the insurance company had requested independent medical examinations (IMEs) for each of the claims in accordance with the procedures and time frames set forth in the no-fault implementing regulations. However, the court determined that it was impossible to discern from the record whether the insurance company complied with the requisite time frames requiring it to request IMEs within 15 days of receiving the claims and scheduling the IMEs for within 30 days of receiving their claims. Therefore, the court held that the insurance company failed to establish its prima facie entitlement to summary judgment and reversed the lower court's decisions, denying the insurance company's motion for summary judgment in both cases.

Reported in New York Official Reports at American Tr. Ins. Co. v Martinez (2022 NY Slip Op 00963)

American Tr. Ins. Co. v Martinez (2022 NY Slip Op 00963)
American Tr. Ins. Co. v Martinez
2022 NY Slip Op 00963 [202 AD3d 526]
February 15, 2022
Appellate Division, First Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
As corrected through Wednesday, March 30, 2022

[*1]

 American Transit Insurance Company, Respondent,
v
Moises Martinez et al., Defendants, and Burke Physical Therapy PC et al., Appellants. American Transit Insurance Company, Respondent, v Saleema Watson Bey et al., Defendants, and Longevity Medical Supply Inc et al., Appellants.

The Rybak Firm, PLLC, Brooklyn (Maksim Leyvi of counsel), for appellants.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Arlene P. Bluth, J.), entered on or about December 11, 2020, in index No. 656140/18, which granted plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment declaring that it need not honor or pay any claims from defendants Burke Physical Therapy, P.C., Columbus Imaging Center, LLC, Metro Pain Specialists, P.C., and Right Aid Medical Supply Corp. in connection with a May 22, 2018 accident, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion denied.

Order, same court and Justice, entered on or about October 6, 2020, in index No. 656207/18, which granted plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment declaring that it need not honor or pay any claims from defendants Longevity Medical Supply, Inc., Sanford Chiropractic, P.C., and Verebrae Chiropractic Care, P.C. in connection with an accident that occurred on June 11, 2018, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion denied.

The failure to appear for a properly scheduled independent medical examination (IME) requested by the insurer “when, and as often as, it may reasonably require is a breach of a condition precedent to coverage under the no-fault policy” and vitiates coverage ab initio (Unitrin Advantage Ins. Co. v Bayshore Physical Therapy, PLLC, 82 AD3d 559, 560 [1st Dept 2011], lv denied 17 NY3d 705 [2011] [internal quotations marks, brackets, and citation omitted]). However, to meet its prima facie burden for summary judgment where it has denied a claim for no-fault benefits based on a patient’s failure to appear for an IME, the insurer must establish that it requested IMEs in accordance with the procedures and time frames set forth in the no-fault implementing regulations and that the patient did not appear (American Tr. Ins. Co. v Longevity Med. Supply, Inc., 131 AD3d 841, 841-842 [1st Dept 2015]). Because it is impossible to discern from the record in each case here whether plaintiff complied with the requisite time frames requiring it to request IMEs within 15 days of receiving appellants’ claims and scheduling the IMEs for within 30 days of receiving their claims (11 NYCRR 65-3.5 [b], [d]), plaintiff failed to establish its prima facie entitlement to summary judgment (Longevity Med. Supply, 131 AD3d at 841-842; see Kemper Independence Ins. Co. v Adelaida Physical Therapy, P.C., 147 AD3d 437, 438 [1st Dept 2017]). Concur—Kern, J.P., Oing, Singh, Moulton, González, JJ.