July 25, 2008
Boro Med. Supplies, Inc. v Country Wide Ins. Co. (2008 NY Slip Op 52698(U))
Headnote
Reported in New York Official Reports at Boro Med. Supplies, Inc. v Country Wide Ins. Co. (2008 NY Slip Op 52698(U))
| Boro Med. Supplies, Inc. v Country Wide Ins. Co. |
| 2008 NY Slip Op 52698(U) [25 Misc 3d 132(A)] |
| Decided on July 25, 2008 |
| 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| This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports. |
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
APPELLATE TERM: 2nd, 11th and 13th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
PRESENT: : PESCE, P.J., and RIOS, J.
2007-166 Q C
against
Country Wide Insurance Company, Respondent. DECISION
Motion by appellant for leave to appeal to the Appellate Division from the order of this court dated February 8, 2008 denied as academic.
On the court’s own motion, reargument of the order and decision of this court in the above-entitled action, dated February 8, 2008, is granted and, upon reargument, the order and decision of this court dated February 8, 2008 are vacated and the following is substituted as the decision of the court:
Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County (Diane A. Lebedeff, J.), dated October 17, 2006. The order denied plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment.
Order reversed without costs, plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment granted and matter remanded to the court below for a calculation of statutory interest and an assessment of attorney’s fees.
In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, plaintiff moved
for summary judgment. Defendant opposed plaintiff’s motion, asserting,
inter alia, that the affidavits submitted by plaintiff were insufficient to support plaintiff’s
motion for summary judgment and that plaintiff failed to submit a timely claim for
reimbursement of benefits. The court denied plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, holding
that defendant raised triable issues of fact as to the denial of the claim and as to whether plaintiff
timely mailed the bills to defendant. This appeal by plaintiff ensued.
Plaintiff established its prima facie entitlement to summary judgment by proof that it [*2]submitted the claim form, setting forth the fact and the amount of the loss sustained, and that payment of no-fault benefits was overdue (Insurance Law § 5106 [a]; Mary Immaculate Hosp. v Allstate Ins. Co., 5 AD3d 742 [2004]; see also Mani Med., P.C. v NY Cent. Mut. Ins. Co., 19 Misc 3d 128[A], 2008 NY Slip Op 50508[U] [App Term, 2d & 11th Jud Dists 2008]). The burden, therefore, shifted to defendant to demonstrate the existence of a triable issue of fact (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320 [1986]).
The affidavit’ of defendant’s no-fault supervisor, submitted by defendant to establish that defendant timely denied plaintiff’s claim, was not signed. Thus, the affidavit’ is of no probative value and defendant failed to establish that it timely denied plaintiff’s claim within the 30-day prescribed period (Insurance Department Regulations [11 NYCRR] § 65-3.8 [c]). As a result, defendant is precluded from raising most defenses (see Presbyterian Hosp. in City of NY v Maryland Cas. Co., 90 NY2d 274, 282 [1997]), including its proffered defense that the claim was submitted more than 45 days after the date of service.
Accordingly, plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment is granted and the matter is remanded to the court below for a calculation of statutory interest and an assessment of attorney’s fees pursuant to Insurance Law § 5106 (a) and the regulations promulgated thereunder.
Pesce, P.J., and Rios, J., concur.
Decision Date: July 25, 2008