August 23, 2013

Queens Integrated Med. Care P.C. v New York Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co. (2013 NY Slip Op 51400(U))

Headnote

The main facts of the case are that Queens Integrated Medical Care P.C. brought a lawsuit against New York Central Mutual Fire Insurance Company, in relation to a no-fault claim for physical therapy and related services. The main issue considered by the court was whether there was a triable issue as to the medical necessity of the physical therapy and related services, due to conflicting medical expert opinions. The holding of the court was that the conflicting medical expert opinions presented by the parties were sufficient to raise a triable issue as to the medical necessity of the services, and therefore the motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint was denied in part.

Reported in New York Official Reports at Queens Integrated Med. Care P.C. v New York Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co. (2013 NY Slip Op 51400(U))

Queens Integrated Med. Care P.C. v New York Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co. (2013 NY Slip Op 51400(U)) [*1]

Queens Integrated Med. Care P.C. v New York Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co.

2013 NY Slip Op 51400(U) [40 Misc 3d 138(A)]

Decided on August 23, 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This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 August 23, 2013

SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, FIRST DEPARTMENT

PRESENT: Torres, J.P., Schoenfeld, Shulman,JJ
570903/12.

Queens Integrated Medical Care P.C., a/a/o Guerline Benjamin, Plaintiff-Respondent,
against
New York Central Mutual Fire Insurance Company, Defendant-Appellant.

Defendant, as limited by its brief, appeals from that portion of an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Bronx County (Gerald Lebovits, J.), entered July 9, 2012, which denied, in part, its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Per Curiam.

Order (Gerald Lebovits, J.), entered July 9, 2012, insofar as appealed from, 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 physical therapy and related services underlying plaintiff’s first-party no-fault claim.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.
Decision Date: August 23, 2013