December 7, 2007

Gentle Care Acupuncture, P.C. v Allstate Ins. Co. (2007 NY Slip Op 52334(U))

Headnote

The main issue in this case was whether the provider was entitled to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits from the insurance company. The court considered the evidence presented, including an affirmation from the plaintiff's counsel, an affidavit by an employee of the plaintiff, and various documents annexed to the motion papers. The affidavit by the plaintiff's employee was deemed insufficient to establish their personal knowledge of the plaintiff's practices and procedures, thereby failing to lay a foundation for the admission of the documents as business records. As a result, the court denied the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on the grounds that there were issues of fact as to coverage and the timeliness of the defendant's denial of claim forms. The holding of the court was to affirm the order denying the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment, albeit on different grounds.

Reported in New York Official Reports at Gentle Care Acupuncture, P.C. v Allstate Ins. Co. (2007 NY Slip Op 52334(U))

Gentle Care Acupuncture, P.C. v Allstate Ins. Co. (2007 NY Slip Op 52334(U)) [*1]
Gentle Care Acupuncture, P.C. v Allstate Ins. Co.
2007 NY Slip Op 52334(U) [17 Misc 3d 138(A)]
Decided on December 7, 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This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 December 7, 2007

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE TERM: 2nd and 11th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS


PRESENT: : WESTON PATTERSON, J.P., GOLIA and BELEN, JJ
2006-2042 Q C.
Gentle Care Acupuncture, P.C. as assignee of Renae Bryant, Appellant,

against

Allstate Insurance Co., Respondent.

Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County (Arthur F. Engoron J.), entered June 21, 2006. 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 an employee of plaintiff, and various documents annexed thereto. The affidavit executed by plaintiff’s employee 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 employee did not proffer facts in admissible form so as to establish plaintiff’s prima
facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law. The court denied plaintiff’s motion on the ground that there were issues of fact as to coverage as well as with respect to the timeliness of defendant’s denial of claim forms. This appeal by plaintiff ensued.

Since the affidavit submitted by plaintiff’s employee was insufficient to establish that said employee 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 (Dan Med., P.C. v New York Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 14 Misc 3d 44 [App Term, 2d & 11th Jud Dists 2006]). Consequently, the order denying plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment is affirmed, albeit on other grounds.

Weston Patterson, J.P., Golia and Belen, JJ., concur.
Decision Date: December 7, 2007