March 1, 2005

Metro Med. Diagnostics, P.C. v Motor Veh. Acc. Indem. Corp. (2005 NY Slip Op 50240(U))

https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/metro-med-diagnostics-p-c-v-motor-veh-acc-indem-corp-2005-ny-slip-op-50240u/

Court: Appellate Term, Second Department
Decided: March 1, 2005
Citation: 2005 NY Slip Op 50240(U)
Posture: Other motion
Outcome: Insurer prevailed
Issues: Discovery and procedure

Cite as

Metro Med. Diagnostics, P.C. v Motor Veh. Acc. Indem. Corp., 2005 NY Slip Op 50240(U) (App Term, 2d Dept, 2d & 11th Jud Dists 2005)

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.

MVAIC's motion to sever the provider's eight remaining no-fault causes of action into four actions under CPLR 603 was granted on appeal. Two causes of action had been discontinued by stipulation in the provider's action involving five assignors and five separate accidents. The Appellate Term, Second Department, reversed for the reasons stated in the companion appeal decided the same day, No. 2004-1019 Q C.

Reported in New York Official Reports at Metro Med. Diagnostics, P.C. v Motor Veh. Acc. Indem. Corp. (2005 NY Slip Op 50240(U))

[*1]

Metro Med. Diagnostics, P.C. v Motor Veh. Acc. Indem. Corp.

2005 NY Slip Op 50240(U)

Decided on March 1, 2005

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This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 March 1, 2005

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE TERM: 2nd and 11th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS

PRESENT: PESCE, P.J., PATTERSON and GOLIA, JJ.
2004-1022 Q C

METRO MEDICAL DIAGNOSTICS, PC, ASSIGNEE OF LUDMILA KHOLODILOVA, DANIEL WARREN, VALERIY AREFYEV, MOHAMED ABDALKADAR and DERRECK TUITT, Respondent,

against

MOTOR VEHICLE ACCIDENT INDEMNITY CORPORATION, Appellant.

Appeal by defendant from an order of the Civil Court, Queens County (H. Lane, J.), entered May 24, 2004, denying its motion to sever.

Order unanimously reversed without costs and defendant’s motion to sever granted.

Plaintiff commenced this action to recover no-fault benefits as assignee of five assignors. The claims arose out of five separate accidents. Two causes of action were discontinued by stipulation, and defendant moved to sever the remaining eight causes of action into four separate actions pursuant to CPLR 603, which motion the court below denied.

The order should be reversed for the reasons set forth in Metro Med. Diagnostics, PC v Motor Veh. Acc. Indem. Corp. (___ Misc 3d ____, 2005 NY Slip Op ______ [No. 2004-1019 Q C, decided herewith]).
Decision Date: March 01, 2005

Similar decisions

Ladim DME, Inc. v GEICO Gen. Ins. Co. (2007 NY Slip Op 50997(U))The insurer's answer supplied a basis to sever five assignors' claims arising from separate accidents without a prejudice affidavit.
Maria Oca, M.D., P.C. v MVAIC (2012 NY Slip Op 50758(U))MVAIC's motion to sever was granted because the three assignors' claims arose from separate accidents and were unlikely to share factual issues.
Ocean Diagnostics Imaging P.C. v State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. (2006 NY Slip Op 50913(U))The provider's claims from 11 separate accidents were properly severed because the defenses raised few common issues of law or fact.
S.I.A. Med. Supply Inc. v GEICO Ins. Co. (2005 NYSlipOp 51170(U))The provider's claims for 11 assignors were severed because they presented few common issues and a joint trial risked confusion.
Colin Clarke, M.D., P.C. v MVAIC (2021 NY Slip Op 50729(U))MVAIC was entitled to sever six assignors' claims because they presented few common factual issues and required numerous defense witnesses.