December 1, 2004

New York Neurology Assoc., P.C. v Travelers Indem. Co. (2004 NY Slip Op 51495(U))

Headnote

A provider brought a special proceeding to vacate a master arbitrator's award that affirmed an arbitrator's denial of its $3,211.42 assigned no-fault claim for lack of medical necessity. The master arbitrator found the arbitrator made a rational determination of no medical necessity. The Appellate Term held the Civil Court correctly found the provider failed to show any CPLR 7511 (b) ground for vacating the award. It affirmed and noted that a special proceeding should end in a judgment rather than an order.

Reported in New York Official Reports at New York Neurology Assoc., P.C. v Travelers Indem. Co. (2004 NY Slip Op 51495(U))

[*1]
New York Neurology Assoc., P.C. v Travelers Indem. Co.
2004 NY Slip Op 51495(U)
Decided on December 1, 2004
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This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 1, 2004
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE TERM: 2nd and 11th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS

PRESENT: PESCE, P.J., PATTERSON and RIOS, JJ.
2004-191 Q C

NEW YORK NEUROLOGY ASSOCIATES, P.C., ASSIGNEE OF ANA CRUEL, Appellant,

against

TRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANY, Respondent.


Appeal by petitioner from an order of the Civil Court, Queens County (D. Pineda-Kirwan, J.), entered November 13, 2003, denying its petition to vacate the master arbitrator’s award.


Order unanimously affirmed without costs.

Petitioner New York Neurology Associates, P.C., commenced the instant special proceeding to vacate the May 2003 master arbitrator’s award which affirmed the February 2003 arbitrator’s award denying its claim for $3,211.42 in assigned no-fault
benefits, on the ground that it failed to establish the medical necessity for the services rendered. The master arbitrator determined that the arbitrator “clearly made a rationale determination that the treatment was [not] medically necessary.”

A review of the record on appeal indicates that the court below correctly determined that petitioner failed to demonstrate that any of the CPLR 7511 (b) statutory criteria for vacating the master arbitrator’s award were applicable (see e.g. Matter of Petrofsky [Allstate Ins. Co.], 54 NY2d 207 [1981]; Matter of Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v Spine Americare Med., 294 AD2d 574 [2002]). Petitioner’s remaining contentions lack merit.

We note that a special proceeding should terminate in a judgment, not an order (see CPLR 411).
Decision Date: December 01, 2004