March 15, 2007

Vista Surgical Supplies, Inc. v Allstate Ins. Co. (2007 NY Slip Op 50502(U))

Headnote

The court considered the sufficiency of the evidence submitted in support of the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment in a case involving a provider seeking to recover first-party no-fault benefits. The main issue decided was whether the affidavit by plaintiff's corporate officer laid a proper foundation for the admission of the documents annexed to the plaintiff's motion papers as business records. The court held that the affidavit submitted by plaintiff's corporate officer was insufficient to establish the officer's personal knowledge of plaintiff's practices and procedures, and as a result, plaintiff failed to make a prima facie showing of its entitlement to summary judgment. Therefore, the court affirmed the denial of the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment.

Reported in New York Official Reports at Vista Surgical Supplies, Inc. v Allstate Ins. Co. (2007 NY Slip Op 50502(U))

Vista Surgical Supplies, Inc. v Allstate Ins. Co. (2007 NY Slip Op 50502(U)) [*1]
Vista Surgical Supplies, Inc. v Allstate Ins. Co.
2007 NY Slip Op 50502(U) [15 Misc 3d 126(A)]
Decided on March 15, 2007
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This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 March 15, 2007

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE TERM: 9th and 10th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS


PRESENT: : RUDOLPH, P.J., TANENBAUM and LaCAVA, JJ
2006-701 N C.
Vista Surgical Supplies, Inc. a/a/o Alfonso Whittington, Appellant,

against

Allstate Insurance Co., Respondent.

Appeal from an order of the District Court of Nassau County, Third District (Scott Fairgrieve, J.), entered October 5, 2005. The order denied plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment.

Order affirmed without costs.

In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment was supported by an affirmation from plaintiff’s counsel, an affidavit by a corporate officer of plaintiff, and various documents annexed thereto. The affidavit executed by plaintiff’s corporate officer stated in a conclusory manner that the documents attached to plaintiff’s motion papers were plaintiff’s business records. In opposition, defendant argued, inter alia, that the affidavit by plaintiff’s corporate officer failed to lay a proper foundation for the documents annexed to plaintiff’s moving papers and that, as a result, plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case. Plaintiff appeals from the denial of its motion for summary judgment.

Since the affidavit submitted by plaintiff’s corporate officer was insufficient to establish that said officer possessed personal knowledge of plaintiff’s practices and procedures so as to lay a foundation for the admission, as business records, of the documents annexed to plaintiff’s moving papers, plaintiff failed to make a prima facie showing of its entitlement to summary judgment (see Fortune Med., P.C. v Allstate Ins. Co., ___ Misc 3d ___[A], 2007 NY Slip Op 50243[U] [App Term, 9th & 10th Jud Dists]; Dan Med., P.C. v New York Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 14 Misc 3d 44 [App Term, 2d & 11th Jud Dists 2006]). Consequently, plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment was properly denied.

Rudolph, P.J., Tanenbaum and LaCava, JJ., concur.
Decision Date: March 15, 2007