• 347-746-6001
  • contact@beynensonlaw.com
Beynenson Law
Beynenson Law
  • Services
    • Search Case Law & Regulations
    • New Decisions
    • Decisions by Court
    • Legal Questions
    • No-Fault Regulations
    • Claim Process & Deadlines
    • Ask No-Fault AI
    • Arbitrator Scorecard
    • Award Volume
    • Arbitrator / Carrier Data
    • Provider / Carrier Data
    • Provider / Attorney Data
    • Arbitration Pro Extension
  • About Us
  • Contact
  • East Hampton, New York

  • 347-746-6001
  • contact@beynensonlaw.com
  • Services
    • Search Case Law & Regulations
    • New Decisions
    • Decisions by Court
    • Legal Questions
    • No-Fault Regulations
    • Claim Process & Deadlines
    • Ask No-Fault AI
    • Arbitrator Scorecard
    • Award Volume
    • Arbitrator / Carrier Data
    • Provider / Carrier Data
    • Provider / Attorney Data
    • Arbitration Pro Extension
  • About Us
  • Contact
September 15, 2017

Compas Med., P.C. v American Tr. Ins. Co. (2017 NY Slip Op 51191(U))

https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/compas-med-p-c-v-american-tr-ins-co-2017-ny-slip-op-51191u/

Court
Appellate Term, Second Department
Decided
September 15, 2017
Citation
2017 NY Slip Op 51191(U) · 57 Misc 3d 130(A)
Posture
Summary judgment
Outcome
Insurer prevailed
Issues
Timeliness and preclusion
Cite as
Compas Med., P.C. v American Tr. Ins. Co., 57 Misc 3d 130(A), 2017 NY Slip Op 51191(U) (App Term, 2d Dept, 2d, 11th & 13th Jud Dists 2017)

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 established untimely notice of the accident, and the provider failed to rebut that proof. The insurer cross-moved to dismiss the provider's assigned no-fault action on that ground, among others, under 11 NYCRR 65-1.1 (d). The Appellate Term, Second Department, affirmed the order denying the provider summary judgment and granting the insurer summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Because the unrebutted notice proof supported dismissal, the provider's remaining appellate arguments were academic.

Reported in New York Official Reports at Compas Med., P.C. v American Tr. Ins. Co. (2017 NY Slip Op 51191(U))

[*1]
Compas Med., P.C. v American Tr. Ins. Co.
2017 NY Slip Op 51191(U) [57 Misc 3d 130(A)]
Decided on September 15, 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 September 15, 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
2014-1826 Q C
Compas Medical, P.C., as Assignee of Grandoit, Andre, Appellant,

against

American Transit Ins. Co., Respondent.

The Rybak Firm, PLLC (Damin J. Toell, Esq.), for appellant. Law Office of Jason Tenenbaum, P.C. (Jason Tenenbaum, Esq.), for respondent.

Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County (William A. Viscovich, J.), entered June 30, 2014. The order denied plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and granted defendant’s cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with $25 costs.

In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, plaintiff appeals from an order of the Civil Court which denied plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, and granted defendant’s cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground, among others, that defendant had not received timely notice of the accident (see 11 NYCRR 65-1.1 [d]).

Contrary to plaintiff’s argument on appeal, the proof submitted by defendant established that it had not received timely notice of the accident, which proof was not rebutted by plaintiff.

In view of the foregoing, plaintiff’s remaining arguments are academic.

Accordingly, the order is affirmed.

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


ENTER:
Paul Kenny
Chief Clerk
Decision Date: September 15, 2017

Similar decisions

  • Compas Med., P.C. v ELRAC, Inc. (2016 NY Slip Op 51497(U))The defendant established untimely accident notice, timely denials, and the absence of a reasonable justification for the delay.
  • Medical Careworks, P.C. v American Tr. Ins. Co. (2012 NY Slip Op 51281(U))The insurer established late notice of the accident, and the provider offered neither contrary proof nor a reasonable justification.
  • Compas Med., P.C. v New York Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co. (2016 NY Slip Op 51417(U))The insurer established proper mailing of verification requests and denials and timely denial after receipt of verification.
  • Compas Med., P.C. v Allstate Ins. Co. (2016 NY Slip Op 51356(U))The insurer failed to establish timely mailing of the denials supporting its EUO nonappearance defense.
  • Compas Med., P.C. v Hartford Ins. Co. (2017 NY Slip Op 50953(U))The insurer's submissions established a presumption that its IME nonappearance denials were timely and properly mailed.
Beynenson Law

Tech-driven New York no-fault collections for healthcare providers.

About the firm

Contact

  • East Hampton, New York

  • 347-746-6001
  • contact@beynensonlaw.com
  • Contact form

Research

  • Search Case Law & Regulations
  • New Decisions
  • Decisions by Court
  • Legal Questions
  • No-Fault Regulations
  • Claim Process & Deadlines
  • Ask No-Fault AI

Arbitration Data

  • Arbitrator Scorecard
  • Award Volume
  • Arbitrator / Carrier Data
  • Provider / Carrier Data
  • Provider / Attorney Data
  • Arbitration Pro Extension

©2026 The Beynenson Law Group, PC. Terms of Use Privacy Policy

Site by khrystev.dev

Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. This website provides general information, not legal advice, and using it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Do not send confidential information through this site.