December 8, 2017

Pierre J. Renelique, M.D., P.C. v Travelers Ins. Co. (2017 NY Slip Op 51718(U))

Headnote

The relevant facts considered by the court in this case were that the plaintiff, Pierre J. Renelique, M.D., P.C., was seeking to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits. The court considered the defendant's motion for summary judgment, which sought to dismiss the first and fourth through seventh causes of action. The main issue decided was whether the proof submitted by the defendant was sufficient to give rise to a presumption that the verification requests and denial of claim forms had been properly mailed, and whether the plaintiff had failed to appear for examinations under oath. The holding of the court was that the proof submitted by the defendant was indeed sufficient in both instances, and therefore the order granting the dismissal of the causes of action was affirmed.

Reported in New York Official Reports at Pierre J. Renelique, M.D., P.C. v Travelers Ins. Co. (2017 NY Slip Op 51718(U))

Pierre J. Renelique, M.D., P.C. v Travelers Ins. Co. (2017 NY Slip Op 51718(U)) [*1]

Pierre J. Renelique, M.D., P.C. v Travelers Ins. Co.

2017 NY Slip Op 51718(U) [58 Misc 3d 127(A)]

Decided on December 8, 2017

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This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 8, 2017

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

PRESENT: : MICHAEL L. PESCE, P.J., THOMAS P. ALIOTTA, MARTIN M. SOLOMON, JJ
2014-2113 Q C

Pierre J. Renelique, M.D., P.C., as Assignee of Brumaire, Shimaine, Appellant,
against
Travelers Insurance Company, Respondent.

The Rybak Firm, PLLC (Damin J, Toell, Esq.), for appellant. Law Office of Aloy O. Ibuzor, for respondent (no brief filed).

Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County (Larry Love, J.), entered August 8, 2014. The order, insofar as appealed from, granted the branches of defendant’s motion seeking summary judgment dismissing the first and fourth through seventh causes of action.

ORDERED that the order, insofar as appealed from, is affirmed, with $25 costs.

In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, plaintiff appeals from so much of an order of the Civil Court as granted the branches of defendant’s motion seeking summary judgment dismissing the first and fourth through seventh causes of action.

Contrary to plaintiff’s argument, the proof submitted by defendant in support of its motion was sufficient to give rise to a presumption that the verification requests and denial of claim forms at issue had been properly mailed (see St. Vincent’s Hosp. of Richmond v Government Empls. Ins. Co., 50 AD3d 1123 [2008]; Residential Holding Corp. v Scottsdale Ins. Co., 286 AD2d 679 [2001]). Contrary to plaintiff’s only other contention on appeal, the proof submitted [*2]by defendant in support of its motion was sufficient to demonstrate that plaintiff had failed to appear for examinations under oath (see Stephen Fogel Psychological, P.C. v Progressive Cas. Ins. Co., 35 AD3d 720 [2006]).

Accordingly, the order, insofar as appealed from, is affirmed.

PESCE, P.J., ALIOTTA and SOLOMON, JJ., concur.

ENTER:
Paul Kenny
Chief Clerk
Decision Date: December 08, 2017