January 2, 2007

Fair Price Med. Supply Corp. v GEICO (2007 NY Slip Op 50012(U))

Headnote

The provider failed to establish a business-record foundation because its officer's affidavit did not show the required personal knowledge. The Appellate Term, Second Department, affirmed denial of the provider's summary judgment motion in an assigned no-fault action. The corporate officer described the attached documents as business records only conclusorily. The affidavit did not establish personal knowledge of the provider's practices and procedures sufficient to support their admission. Following Dan Med., P.C. v New York Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co., the court concluded that the provider had not made a prima facie showing of entitlement to summary judgment.

Reported in New York Official Reports at Fair Price Med. Supply Corp. v GEICO (2007 NY Slip Op 50012(U))

[*1]
Fair Price Med. Supply Corp. v GEICO
2007 NY Slip Op 50012(U) [14 Misc 3d 129(A)]
Decided on January 2, 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This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 January 2, 2007
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE TERM: 2nd and 11th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS

PRESENT: : PESCE, P.J., WESTON PATTERSON and BELEN, JJ
2005-1930 K C.

Fair Price Medical Supply Corp., a/a/o Anthony Anderson, Appellant,

against

GEICO Insurance Company, Respondent.


Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Peter Paul Sweeney, J.), entered September 15, 2005. The order denied plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment.


Order affirmed without costs.

In this action by a 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]). Accordingly, plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment was properly denied.

Pesce, P.J., Weston Patterson and Belen, JJ., concur. [*2]
Decision Date: January 2, 2007