December 13, 2013

Pomona Med. Diagnostics, P.C. v Praetorian Ins. Co. (2013 NY Slip Op 52131(U))

Headnote

The court considered conflicting medical expert opinions regarding the medical necessity of the diagnostic tests underlying the plaintiff's first-party no-fault claim. The main issue decided was whether the conflicting medical expert opinions raised a triable issue as to the medical necessity of the diagnostic tests. The court held that the conflicting medical expert opinions sufficed to raise a triable issue as to the medical necessity of the diagnostic tests underlying the plaintiff's first-party no-fault claim. Therefore, the court affirmed the order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Bronx County, which denied the defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Reported in New York Official Reports at Pomona Med. Diagnostics, P.C. v Praetorian Ins. Co. (2013 NY Slip Op 52131(U))

Pomona Med. Diagnostics, P.C. v Praetorian Ins. Co. (2013 NY Slip Op 52131(U)) [*1]

Pomona Med. Diagnostics, P.C. v Praetorian Ins. Co.

2013 NY Slip Op 52131(U) [42 Misc 3d 126(A)]

Decided on December 13, 2013

Appellate Term, First 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This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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, 2013

SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, FIRST DEPARTMENT

PRESENT: Lowe, III, P.J., Hunter, Jr., Torres, JJ
570567/13.

Pomona Medical Diagnostics, P.C. a/a/o Rafael Ramirez, Plaintiff-Respondent, – –
against
Praetorian Insurance Company, Defendant-Appellant.

Defendant, as limited by its brief, appeals from so much of an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Bronx County (Donald A. Miles, J.), entered on or about July 19, 2012, as denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Per Curiam.

Order (Donald A. Miles, J.), entered July 19, 2012, affirmed, with $10 costs.

We agree that the conflicting medical expert opinions adduced by the parties sufficed to raise a triable issue as to the medical necessity of the diagnostic tests underlying plaintiff’s first-party no-fault claim.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.
Decision Date: December 13, 2013