February 6, 2007

Delta Diagnostic Radiology, P.C. v American Tr. Ins. Co. (2007 NY Slip Op 50238(U))

Headnote

The court considered the motion for summary judgment brought by a health care provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits. The motion was supported by an affirmation from the provider's counsel, an affidavit by a corporate officer of the provider, and various documents. However, the affidavit by the corporate officer was found to be insufficient to establish that the officer had personal knowledge of the provider's practices and procedures, and thus, failed to lay a foundation for the admission of the documents as business records. As a result, the court denied the provider's motion for summary judgment. The main issue decided was whether the affidavit submitted by the provider's corporate officer established a proper foundation for the admission of the documents as business records, and the court held that it did not. Therefore, the denial of the motion for summary judgment was affirmed.

Reported in New York Official Reports at Delta Diagnostic Radiology, P.C. v American Tr. Ins. Co. (2007 NY Slip Op 50238(U))

Delta Diagnostic Radiology, P.C. v American Tr. Ins. Co. (2007 NY Slip Op 50238(U)) [*1]
Delta Diagnostic Radiology, P.C. v American Tr. Ins. Co.
2007 NY Slip Op 50238(U) [14 Misc 3d 136(A)]
Decided on February 6, 2007
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This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 February 6, 2007

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE TERM: 2nd and 11th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS


PRESENT: : WESTON PATTERSON, J.P., RIOS and BELEN, JJ
2006-480 K C.
Delta Diagnostic Radiology, P.C., a/a/o ANICHKIN RAISA, Appellant,

against

American Transit Insurance Co., Respondent.

Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Kathy J. King, J.), entered October 4, 2005. The order denied plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment.

Order affirmed without costs.

In this action by a health care provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment was supported by an affirmation from plaintiff’s counsel, an affidavit by a corporate officer of plaintiff, and various documents annexed thereto. The affidavit executed by plaintiff’s corporate officer stated in a conclusory manner that the documents attached to plaintiff’s motion papers were plaintiff’s business records. In opposition, defendant argued, inter alia, that the affidavit by plaintiff’s corporate officer failed to lay a proper foundation for the
documents annexed to plaintiff’s moving papers and that, as a result, plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case. Plaintiff appeals from the denial of its motion for summary judgment.

Inasmuch as the affidavit submitted by plaintiff’s corporate officer was insufficient to establish that said officer possessed personal knowledge of plaintiff’s practices and procedures so as to lay a foundation for the admission, as business records, of the documents annexed to plaintiff’s moving papers, plaintiff failed to make a prima facie showing of its entitlement to summary judgment (see Dan Med., P.C. v New York Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co., ___ Misc 3d ___, 2006 NY Slip Op 26483 [App Term, 2d & 11th Jud
Dists]). Consequently, plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment was properly denied.

Weston Patterson, J.P., Rios and Belen, JJ., concur.
Decision Date: February 6, 2007