August 8, 2025

Right Aid Med. Supply Corp. v New York City Tr. Auth. (2025 NY Slip Op 51514(U))

Headnote

The self-insurer established lack of coverage because none of its vehicles was involved in the assignor's accident. In support of its cross-motion for summary judgment dismissing the provider's assigned no-fault claims, the self-insurer submitted the assignor's sworn NF-2 application and a search of its own records. Together, they established that no vehicle belonging to the self-insurer was involved and that the assignor was driving a vehicle it did not own. The provider failed to raise a triable issue. Applying Insurance Law § 5103 (a) (1) and 11 NYCRR 65-2.2 (a) and (j) (3), the Appellate Term, Second Department, affirmed the denial of the provider's motion and the grant of the self-insurer's cross-motion.

Reported in New York Official Reports at Right Aid Med. Supply Corp. v New York City Tr. Auth. (2025 NY Slip Op 51514(U))

[*1]
Right Aid Med. Supply Corp. v New York City Tr. Auth.
2025 NY Slip Op 51514(U) [87 Misc 3d 128(A)]
Decided on August 8, 2025
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This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 August 8, 2025
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, SECOND DEPARTMENT, 2d, 11th and 13th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS

PRESENT: : WAVNY TOUSSAINT, P.J., CHEREÉ A. BUGGS, LISA S. OTTLEY, JJ
2024-487 K C

Right Aid Medical Supply Corp., as Assignee of Ebu, Margaret, Appellant,

against

New York City Transit Authority, Respondent.


The Rybak Firm, PLLC (Damin J. Toell and Richard Rozhik of counsel), for appellant. Foley, Smith, O’Boyle & Weisman (Eric W. Ostrager and Anastasiya Nabatova of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Rupert V. Barry, J.), dated January 14, 2022. The order denied plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and granted defendant’s cross-motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with $25 costs.

In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, plaintiff appeals from an order of the Civil Court (Rupert V. Barry, J.) dated January 14, 2022, which denied plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and granted defendant’s cross-motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

In support of its cross-motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground of lack of coverage, defendant, a self-insurer, relied on the assignor’s sworn application for no-fault benefits (NF-2) and on a search of defendant’s own records. Together they demonstrated, prima facie, that none of defendant’s vehicles were involved in an accident with plaintiff’s assignor on the day in question (see Jesa Med. Supply, Inc. v NYC Tr. Auth., 38 Misc 3d 138[A], 2013 NY Slip Op 50188[U] [App Term, 2d Dept, 2d, 11th & 13th Jud Dists 2013]) and that plaintiff’s assignor was driving a vehicle which was not owned by defendant. In opposition, plaintiff failed to demonstrate the existence of a triable issue of fact. Consequently, defendant, a self-insurer, was entitled to summary judgment dismissing the complaint (see Insurance Law § 5103 [a] [1]; 11 NYCRR § 65-2.2 [a], [j] [3]; Complete Med. Care Svcs of NY, P.C. v N.Y.C. Tr. Auth., 49 Misc 3d 10 [App Term, 2d Dept, 2d, 11th & 13th Jud Dists 2015]; Jesa Med. Supply, Inc., 2013 NY Slip Op 50188[U]).

In view of the foregoing, plaintiff’s remaining contentions lack merit.

Accordingly, the order is affirmed.

TOUSSAINT, P.J., BUGGS and OTTLEY, JJ., concur.

ENTER:
Paul Kenny
Chief Clerk
Decision Date: August 8, 2025

Cited in this decision

Similar decisions