December 13, 2019

Parisien v First Acceptance Ins. Co., Inc. (2019 NY Slip Op 52050(U))

https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/parisien-v-first-acceptance-ins-co-inc-2019-ny-slip-op-52050u/

Court: Appellate Term, Second Department
Decided: December 13, 2019
Citation: 2019 NY Slip Op 52050(U) · 66 Misc 3d 129(A)
Posture: Motion to dismiss (CPLR 3211)
Outcome: Insurer prevailed
Issues: Jurisdiction and service
Legal questions: Service and jurisdiction over the insurer (see the maps)

Cite as

Parisien v First Acceptance Ins. Co., Inc., 66 Misc 3d 129(A), 2019 NY Slip Op 52050(U) (App Term, 2d Dept, 2d, 11th & 13th Jud Dists 2019)

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 insurer's motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction under CPLR 3211 (a) (8) was granted on appeal. The Appellate Term, Second Department, reversed the order, insofar as appealed from, for the reasons stated in the companion appeal, Domny Med. Servs., P.C. v First Acceptance Ins. Co., Inc., decided the same day, No. 2018-1104 K C.

Reported in New York Official Reports at Parisien v First Acceptance Ins. Co., Inc. (2019 NY Slip Op 52050(U))

[*1]

Parisien v First Acceptance Ins. Co., Inc.

2019 NY Slip Op 52050(U) [66 Misc 3d 129(A)]

Decided on December 13, 2019

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This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 13, 2019

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

PRESENT: : MICHAEL L. PESCE, P.J., DAVID ELLIOT, BERNICE D. SIEGAL, JJ
2018-1180 K C

Jules Francois Parisien, M.D., as Assignee of Bernabel, Arianny, Respondent,
against
First Acceptance Insurance Company, Inc., Appellant.

Galvano & Xanthakis, P.C. (Steven F. Granville of counsel), for appellant. The Rybak Firm, PLLC (Damin J. Toell and Karina Barska of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Cenceria P. Edwards, J.), entered March 14, 2018. The order, insofar as appealed from, denied defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (8), or for alternative relief.

ORDERED that the order, insofar as appealed from, is reversed, with $30 costs, and defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (8) is granted.

Plaintiff commenced this action to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits by mailing a copy of the summons and complaint to the out-of-state defendant insurance company pursuant to CPLR 312-a. Insofar as is relevant to this appeal, defendant moved, pre-answer, to dismiss the complaint pursuant to, among other things, CPLR 3211 (a) (8), on the ground that the Civil Court lacked personal jurisdiction over defendant. By order entered March 14, 2018, the Civil Court, among other things, denied defendant’s motion.

For the reasons stated in Domny Med. Servs., P.C., as Assignee of Garcia, Lionel v First Acceptance Ins. Co., Inc. ( Misc 3d , 2019 NY Slip Op [appeal No. 2018-1104 K C], decided herewith), the order, insofar as appealed from, is reversed and defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (8) is granted.

PESCE, P.J., ELLIOT and SIEGAL, JJ., concur.

ENTER:
Paul Kenny
Chief Clerk
Decision Date: December 13, 2019

Legal questions

A question of no-fault law this decision rules on, from our Legal Questions pages. Bars count the decisions on the question by year and court, coloured by category; circles are this decision and the decisions on the question it cites or that cite it. Point at a bar or circle for details. The categories and summaries are Beynenson Law’s classification, made by a language model and checked by a second reading.

Service and jurisdiction over the insurer

Open the full map

Was the insurer validly served with process, and does the court have personal jurisdiction over it?

This decision: Method, place, timing or proof of service on the insurer failed, so no jurisdiction was obtained

Held, for the reasons stated in a companion decision, that mail service under CPLR 312-a did not give the court personal jurisdiction over the out-of-state insurer, so its CPLR 3211 (a) (8) motion was granted.

Jurisdiction upheldService defectiveNo jurisdiction over insurerHearing or discovery neededObjection waived/not requiredThis decision

Of the 129 decisions on this question in the Second Department courts and the Court of Appeals, 34 (this one included) are in the same category.

Similar decisions

Parisien v American Ind. Ins. Co. (2019 NY Slip Op 51751(U))The insurer's motion to dismiss the provider's complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction was granted on appeal.
Domny Med. Servs., P.C. v First Acceptance Ins. Co., Inc. (2019 NY Slip Op 52048(U))The provider failed to establish personal jurisdiction because it supplied no signed acknowledgment of service under CPLR 312-a. The provider mailed the summons and complaint to an out-of-state insurer, which moved before answering to dismiss under CPLR 3211 (a) (8).
Parisien v 21st Century Ins. Co. (2018 NY Slip Op 51652(U))The insurer established timely mailing of the denial forms asserting lack of medical necessity, defeating the provider's appellate challenge.
Parisien v Allstate Ins. Co. (2019 NY Slip Op 50755(U))The insurer's summary judgment cross motion on the first, second, fourth, and fifth causes of action was denied on appeal.
Pierre J. Renelique, M.D., P.C. v American Ind. Ins. Co. (2019 NY Slip Op 50638(U))The insurer's motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction under CPLR 3211 (a) (8) was granted on appeal.