May 19, 2015

Metro Health Prods., Inc. v Allstate Ins. Co. (2015 NY Slip Op 50812(U))

https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/metro-health-prods-inc-v-allstate-ins-co-2015-ny-slip-op50812u/

Court: Appellate Term, Second Department
Decided: May 19, 2015
Citation: 2015 NY Slip Op 50812(U) · 47 Misc 3d 153(A)
Posture: Summary judgment
Outcome: Provider prevailed
Issues: Provider's prima facie case

Cite as

Metro Health Prods., Inc. v Allstate Ins. Co., 47 Misc 3d 153(A), 2015 NY Slip Op 50812(U) (App Term, 2d Dept, 2d, 11th & 13th Jud Dists 2015)

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 parties' summary judgment requests were denied because claim submission to the insurer remained a disputed factual issue. The Appellate Term, Second Department, modified the order by striking the reverse summary judgment granted to the insurer upon a search of the record and affirmed denial of the provider's motion. It identified a factual issue concerning submission without discussing the evidence.

Reported in New York Official Reports at Metro Health Prods., Inc. v Allstate Ins. Co. (2015 NY Slip Op 50812(U))

[*1]

Metro Health Prods., Inc. v Allstate Ins. Co.

2015 NY Slip Op 50812(U) [47 Misc 3d 153(A)]

Decided on May 19, 2015

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This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 May 19, 2015

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

PRESENT: : PESCE, P.J., ALIOTTA and SOLOMON, JJ.
2013-159 K C

Metro Health Products, Inc. as Assignee of DANIELLE HAMPTON, Appellant,
against
Allstate Insurance Company, Respondent.

Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Reginald A. Boddie, J.), entered November 14, 2012. The order denied plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and, upon searching the record, granted defendant reverse summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

ORDERED that the order is modified by striking the provision which, upon a search of the record, granted defendant reverse summary judgment dismissing the complaint; as so modified, the order is affirmed, without 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, upon searching the record, granted defendant reverse summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

On the record before us, we find that there is a triable issue of fact as to whether the claims at issue had been submitted to defendant. Therefore, neither party was entitled to summary judgment (see Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557 [1980]).

Accordingly, the order is modified by striking the provision which, upon a search of the record, granted defendant reverse summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Pesce, P.J., Aliotta and Solomon, JJ., concur.

Decision Date: May 19, 2015

Similar decisions

Metro Psychological Servs., P.C. v Allstate Ins. Co. (2019 NY Slip Op 50748(U))The insurer failed to establish timely mailing of its denials, and the provider failed to establish entitlement to payment as a matter of law.
Metro Health Prods., Inc. v State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. (2015 NY Slip Op 50402(U))The provider could not pursue objections to EUO requests it had not answered, and reasonableness discovery was unnecessary to oppose dismissal.
Metro Health Prods., Inc. v American Tr. Ins. Co. (2016 NY Slip Op 51517(U))The insurer's proof established proper mailing of EUO scheduling letters and the assignor's failure to attend the EUOs. In the provider's action for assigned first-party no-fault benefits, the Civil Court denied the provider's summary judgment motion and granted the insurer's cross motion dismissing the complaint.
Metro Psychological Servs., P.C. v Auto One Ins. Co. (2016 NY Slip Op 51376(U))The insurer's summary judgment motion was denied because a triable issue remained concerning medical necessity.
Metropolitan Diagnostic Med. Care, P.C. v New York Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co. (2015 NY Slip Op 50383(U))The provider's physician affirmation raised a triable issue as to whether the services were medically necessary.