August 11, 2017

Clinton Place Med., P.C. v USAA Cas. Ins. Co. (2017 NY Slip Op 51016(U))

Headnote

The main issue in the case was whether the provider, Clinton Place Medical, P.C., was entitled to recover first-party no-fault benefits, as it appealed the denial of their cross motion for summary judgment and the granting of the defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint, or alternatively, compel the plaintiff to respond to the defendant's discovery demands. The court considered the defendant's demand for various financial records and the owner of the plaintiff for an examination before trial, as well as the plaintiff's refusal to produce these records and comply with the demands. The holding of the case was that the order from the Civil Court, which granted the defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint and compel discovery, was affirmed. Therefore, the plaintiff was required to provide the requested financial records and produce the owner for an examination before trial.

Reported in New York Official Reports at Clinton Place Med., P.C. v USAA Cas. Ins. Co. (2017 NY Slip Op 51016(U))

Clinton Place Med., P.C. v USAA Cas. Ins. Co. (2017 NY Slip Op 51016(U)) [*1]

Clinton Place Med., P.C. v USAA Cas. Ins. Co.

2017 NY Slip Op 51016(U) [56 Misc 3d 136(A)]

Decided on August 11, 2017

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This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 August 11, 2017

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

PRESENT: : MICHAEL L. PESCE, P.J., THOMAS P. ALIOTTA, MARTIN M. SOLOMON, JJ
2014-1130 K C

Clinton Place Medical, P.C., as Assignee of Araujo Carmencita, Appellant,
against
USAA Casualty Ins. Co., Respondent.

Korsunskiy Legal Group, P.C. (Michael Hoenig, Esq.), for appellant. McDonnell & Adels, PLLC (Linda A. Mule, Esq.), for respondent.

Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Wavny Toussaint, J.), entered September 5, 2013. The order, insofar as appealed from, granted defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3126 or, in the alternative, to compel plaintiff to respond to defendant’s discovery demands, to the extent of compelling plaintiff to respond to defendant’s discovery demands and to produce plaintiff’s owner for an examination before trial, and denied plaintiff’s cross motion for summary judgment.

ORDERED that the order, insofar as appealed from, is affirmed, with $25 costs.

In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, plaintiff appeals from so much of an order of the Civil Court as denied plaintiff’s cross motion for summary judgment and granted defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3126 or, in the alternative, to compel plaintiff to respond to defendant’s notice for discovery and inspection, and its “demand for verified written interrogatories,” to the extent of compelling plaintiff to provide defendant with, among other things, verified responses to defendant’s discovery demands, including “W-2(s), 1099(s) & 941 tax forms; office records, bank records, management, billing & rental agreements; annual salary of owner and employee; [and] proof of payment regarding use of office space,” and to produce plaintiff’s owner for an examination before trial.

For the reasons stated in Clinton Place Med., P.C., as Assignee of Araujo Carmencita v USAA Cas. Ins. Co. (___ Misc 3d ___, 2017 NY Slip Op ______ [appeal No. 2014-1033 K C], decided herewith), the order, insofar as appealed from, is affirmed.

PESCE, P.J., ALIOTTA and SOLOMON, JJ., concur.

ENTER:
Paul Kenny
Chief Clerk
Decision Date: August 11, 2017