October 18, 2012

Jamhil Med., P.C. v Tri-State Consumer Ins. Co. (2012 NY Slip Op 52049(U))

Headnote

The court considered an appeal from an order of the Civil Court which denied the defendant's motion to vacate a prior order granting the plaintiff's unopposed motion for summary judgment. The main issue decided was whether the Civil Court had improvidently exercised its discretion in denying the defendant's motion to vacate the prior order. The holding of the court was that the Civil Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion, as the defendant failed to demonstrate a reasonable excuse for its failure to submit written opposition to the plaintiff's motion. Therefore, the order denying the defendant's motion to vacate was affirmed.

Reported in New York Official Reports at Jamhil Med., P.C. v Tri-State Consumer Ins. Co. (2012 NY Slip Op 52049(U))

Jamhil Med., P.C. v Tri-State Consumer Ins. Co. (2012 NY Slip Op 52049(U)) [*1]

Jamhil Med., P.C. v Tri-State Consumer Ins. Co.

2012 NY Slip Op 52049(U) [37 Misc 3d 133(A)]

Decided on October 18, 2012

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This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 October 18, 2012

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

PRESENT: : PESCE, P.J., WESTON and RIOS, JJ
2011-986 K C. October 18, 2012

Jamhil Medical, P.C. as Assignee of CAMILLE BODDEN, Respondent, —
against
Tri-State Consumer Insurance Company, Appellant.

Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Carolyn E. Wade, J.), entered February 2, 2011. The order denied defendant’s motion to vacate a prior order of the same court entered June 11, 2010 granting plaintiff’s unopposed motion for summary judgment.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs.

In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, the Civil Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying defendant’s motion to vacate a prior order entered June 11, 2010 granting plaintiff’s unopposed motion for summary judgment, since defendant failed to demonstrate a reasonable excuse for its failure to submit written opposition to plaintiff’s motion (see CPLR 5015 [a]; Eugene Di Lorenzo, Inc. v A.C. Dutton Lbr. Co., 67 NY2d 138, 141 [1986]). Accordingly, the order is affirmed.

Pesce, P.J., Weston and Rios, JJ., concur.
Decision Date: October 18, 2012