June 15, 2016

Urban Well Acupuncture, P.C. v Nationwide Gen. Ins. Co. (2016 NY Slip Op 50906(U))

Headnote

The court considered the defendant-insurer's motion for summary judgment dismissing the action for first-party no-fault benefits. The defendant-insurer established that it timely and properly mailed notices for independent medical examinations (IMEs) to the plaintiff's assignor and the assignor's attorney, and that the assignor failed to appear. The defendant submitted sworn affidavits of the scheduled examining chiropractor/acupuncturist and an employee of the defendant's third-party IME scheduler, demonstrating the assignor's repeated failures to appear for the IMEs. In response, the plaintiff did not specifically deny the assignor's nonappearance or raise a triable issue, and the court affirmed the order granting the defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. The main issue decided was whether the defendant-insurer was entitled to summary judgment dismissing the action for first-party no-fault benefits based on the assignor's failure to appear for scheduled IMEs. The court held that the defendant made a prima facie showing of entitlement to summary judgment by establishing the timely and proper mailing of IME notices and the assignor's nonappearance. The court determined that the plaintiff did not raise a triable issue in opposition to the defendant's motion, and therefore affirmed the order granting summary judgment in favor of the defendant.

Reported in New York Official Reports at Urban Well Acupuncture, P.C. v Nationwide Gen. Ins. Co. (2016 NY Slip Op 50906(U))

Urban Well Acupuncture, P.C. v Nationwide Gen. Ins. Co. (2016 NY Slip Op 50906(U)) [*1]
Urban Well Acupuncture, P.C. v Nationwide Gen. Ins. Co.
2016 NY Slip Op 50906(U) [52 Misc 3d 126(A)]
Decided on June 15, 2016
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This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 June 15, 2016

SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, FIRST DEPARTMENT
PRESENT: Hunter, Jr., J.P, Schoenfeld, Shulman, JJ.
570009/16
Urban Well Acupuncture, P.C., a/a/o Anthony Espinal, Plaintiff-Appellant,

against

Nationwide General Ins. Co., Defendant-Respondent.

Plaintiff appeals from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County (Frank P. Nervo, J.), entered October 1, 2012, which granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Per Curiam.

Order (Frank P. Nervo, J.), entered October 1, 2012, affirmed, with $10 costs.

The defendant-insurer made a prima facie showing of entitlement to summary judgment dismissing the action for first-party no-fault benefits by establishing that it timely and properly mailed the notices for independent medical examinations (IMEs) to plaintiff’s assignor and the assignor’s attorney, and that the assignor failed to appear (see American Tr. Ins. Co. v Lucas, 111 AD3d 423 [2013]; American Tr. Ins. Co. v Solorzano, 108 AD3d 449 [2013]). Contrary to plaintiff’s contention, defendant submitted competent evidence of the assignor’s nonappearance in the form of the sworn affidavits of the scheduled examining chiropractor/acupuncturist and an employee of defendant’s third-party IME scheduler, setting forth sufficient facts to demonstrate the affiants’ personal knowledge of the assignor’s repeated failures to appear for the IMEs and the office practices and policies when an assignor fails to appear for a scheduled IME (see American Tr. Ins. Co. v Lucas, 111 AD3d at 424).

In opposition, plaintiff did not specifically deny the assignor’s nonappearance or otherwise raise a triable issue with respect thereto, or as to the mailing or reasonableness of the underlying notices (see Unitrin Advantage Ins. Co. v Bayshore Physical Therapy, PLLC, 82 AD3d 559, 560 [2011], lv denied 17 NY3d 705 [2011]; see also American Tr. Ins. Co. v Marte-Rosario, 111 AD3d 442 [2013]).

In view of our determination, we reach no other issues.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.


I concur I concur I concur
Decision Date: June 15, 2016