April 15, 2019

Sure Way NY, Inc. v Travelers Ins. Co. (2019 NY Slip Op 50601(U))

Headnote

The court considered whether the assignor of the plaintiff qualified as an eligible injured person under the Florida insurance policy at issue, as the assignor was not a "family member" of the insured. The main issue decided was whether the assignor was a "family member" of the insured as defined in the insurance policy. The court held that the defendant sufficiently established that the assignor did not reside in the household of the Florida policyholder and thus was not a "family member" of the insured. As a result, the defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint was properly granted, and the order was affirmed.

Reported in New York Official Reports at Sure Way NY, Inc. v Travelers Ins. Co. (2019 NY Slip Op 50601(U))

Sure Way NY, Inc. v Travelers Ins. Co. (2019 NY Slip Op 50601(U)) [*1]
Sure Way NY, Inc. v Travelers Ins. Co.
2019 NY Slip Op 50601(U) [63 Misc 3d 142(A)]
Decided on April 15, 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This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 April 15, 2019

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


PRESENT: : MICHELLE WESTON, J.P., THOMAS P. ALIOTTA, DAVID ELLIOT, JJ
2017-9 K C
Sure Way NY, Inc., as Assignee of Dixin, Marla, Appellant,

against

Travelers Insurance Company, Respondent.

The Rybak Firm, PLLC (Damin J. Toell and Karina Barska of counsel), for appellant. Law Offices of Aloy O. Ibuzor (Duane Frankson of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Harriet L. Thompson, J.), entered May 17, 2016. The order granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and denied plaintiff’s cross motion for summary judgment.

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

In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, defendant moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that plaintiff’s assignor does not qualify as an eligible injured person, as the assignor was not a “family member” of the insured as defined in the Florida insurance policy at issue. Plaintiff cross-moved for summary judgment, asserting that, at a minimum, it had established its prima facie case. By order entered May 17, 2016, the Civil Court granted defendant’s motion and denied plaintiff’s cross motion.

Upon the record presented, we find that defendant sufficiently established that plaintiff’s assignor did not reside in the household of the Florida policyholder, but, rather, in Brooklyn, and thus was not a “family member” of the insured as defined by the insurance policy at issue. In opposition, plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact (see Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557 [1980]). Consequently, defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the [*2]complaint was properly granted.

Accordingly, the order is affirmed.

WESTON, J.P., ALIOTTA and ELLIOT, JJ., concur.



ENTER:
Paul Kenny
Chief Clerk
Decision Date: April 15, 2019