April 25, 2008

City Wide Social Work & Psychological Servs., P.L.L.C. v State-Wide Ins. Co. (2008 NY Slip Op 50909(U))

https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/city-wide-social-work-psychological-servs-p-l-l-c-v-state-wide-ins-co-2008ny-slip-op-50909u/

Court: Appellate Term, Second Department
Decided: April 25, 2008
Citation: 2008 NY Slip Op 50909(U) · 19 Misc 3d 140(A)
Posture: Default or vacatur
Outcome: Provider prevailed
Issues: Defaults and vacatur Timeliness and preclusion

Cite as

City Wide Social Work & Psychological Servs., P.L.L.C. v State-Wide Ins. Co., 19 Misc 3d 140(A), 2008 NY Slip Op 50909(U) (App Term, 2d Dept, 2d & 11th Jud Dists 2008)

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 establish a meritorious defense warranting vacatur of a judgment entered on an unopposed summary judgment motion. The insurer argued that the provider had not complied with CPLR 3215 (f), but CPLR 3215 did not apply to a judgment entered pursuant to an order granting summary judgment. Vacatur under CPLR 5015 (a) (1) required a reasonable excuse and a meritorious defense. Citing 11 NYCRR 65-3.5 (b), the court found no showing that the defenses appeared in timely denials or were exempt from preclusion. The Appellate Term, Second Department, reversed the order, insofar as appealed from, and denied the insurer's motion to vacate.

Reported in New York Official Reports at City Wide Social Work & Psychological Servs., P.L.L.C. v State-Wide Ins. Co. (2008 NY Slip Op 50909(U))

[*1]

City Wide Social Work & Psychological Servs., P.L.L.C. v State-Wide Ins. Co.

2008 NY Slip Op 50909(U) [19 Misc 3d 140(A)]

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This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.

Decided on April 25, 2008

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE TERM: 2nd and 11th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS

PRESENT: : PESCE, P.J., WESTON PATTERSON and RIOS, JJ
2006-1968 K C.

City Wide Social Work and Psychological Services, P.L.L.C. a/a/o Arjoonkingh Latchman, Gonzalez Jose L., Munoz Blanca, Joshua Florine and Freidman Devorah, Appellant,
against
State-Wide Ins. Co., Respondent.

Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Genine D. Edwards, J.), entered August 25, 2006. The order, insofar as appealed from as limited by the brief, granted defendant’s motion to vacate the default judgment entered against it.

Order, insofar as appealed from, reversed without costs and defendant’s motion to vacate the default judgment denied.

In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, plaintiff moved for summary judgment and defendant failed to submit opposition. The court granted plaintiff’s motion, and plaintiff entered judgment pursuant thereto. Defendant moved to vacate the judgment, arguing that it was improperly entered
as plaintiff failed to comply with CPLR 3215 (f). The court below granted defendant’s motion. This appeal by plaintiff ensued.

Inasmuch as the judgment was entered pursuant to an order that granted plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment upon defendant’s failure to oppose same, CPLR 3215 is inapplicable. To the extent defendant’s motion sought vacatur pursuant to CPLR 5015 (a) (1), defendant was required to demonstrate both a reasonable excuse for its default and a meritorious defense to the action (see Nurse v Figeroux & Assoc., 47 AD3d 778 [2008]). The record reveals that defendant failed to demonstrate that it has a meritorious defense to plaintiff’s action, since defendant did not show that its proffered defenses were set forth in timely denial of claim forms such that defendant is not precluded from interposing such defenses (see Insurance Department Regulations [11 NYCRR] § 65-3.5 [b]) or that defendant possessed a defense which was not [*2]subject to preclusion (see e.g. Central Gen. Hosp. v Chubb Group of Ins. Cos., 90 NY2d 195, 199 [1997]). In light of the foregoing, defendant’s motion to vacate the judgment should have been denied.

Pesce, P.J., Weston Patterson and Rios, JJ., concur.
Decision Date: April 25, 2008

Similar decisions

Citywide Social Work & Psychological Svcs, P.L.L.C. v Allstate Ins. Co. (2011 NY Slip Op 51407(U))The provider's action was dismissed as abandoned because it sought a default judgment after one year without a reasonable excuse.
Citywide Social Work & Psychological Servs., PLLC v Autoone Ins. Co. (2011 NY Slip Op 51308(U))The provider's summary judgment cross motion was premature because discovery remained outstanding.
City Wide Social Work & Psychological Servs., PLLC v GEICO Gen. Ins. Co. (2007 NY Slip Op 50603(U))The provider's employee affidavits failed to establish a business-records foundation for the claim at issue on appeal.
Psychology Ym, P.C. v Hartford Acc. & Indem. Co. (2008 NY Slip Op 52208(U))The insurer failed to establish a reasonable excuse for its default through counsel's conclusory explanation of delayed complaint processing.
City Dental Servs., P.C. v Country Wide Ins. Co. (2013 NY Slip Op 50474(U))An insurer that defaults in opposing summary judgment must seek vacatur of the default order rather than renewal of its opposition.