# Does an insurer’s no-coverage declaratory judgment, or pending declaratory action, bar or stay a no-fault claimant’s action? Covers decisions that rule on what an insurer's declaratory judgment (DJ) action does to a separate claim for the same benefits: whether a DJ or order declaring that the insurer owes no benefits for an accident, claimant or set of bills precludes (res judicata or collateral estoppel) the provider's (or injured person's) pending or later Civil/District Court action, arbitration, or judgment, in whole or in part; and whether that action should be stayed, enjoined or adjourned while the DJ action is pending. Deciding the question means the court actually applies or refuses to apply the DJ (or the pending DJ action) to the claims before it, for example on a motion for summary judgment, a CPLR 3211 (a) (5) motion, a motion to vacate a default (DJ offered as the meritorious defense), a motion to vacate a judgment or award, or a motion to stay. 'Action' includes no-fault arbitration and UM/SUM arbitration, and enforcement of a judgment already entered. It also covers a claimant's reliance on a ruling made in the insurer's DJ action. - Status: Settled at the Appellate Division, no conflicting department. No Court of Appeals no-fault decision; the courts apply the Court of Appeals' general preclusion rules (Schuylkill Fuel: no second judgment that would destroy or impair rights established by the first; Gramatan: an assignee is bound only if the action against the assignor began before the assignment; Kaufman v Eli Lilly: a default is not 'actually litigated' for collateral estoppel). Both Appellate Terms apply these rules the same way: an unvacated DJ, including a default DJ, that declares no duty to pay a named provider (or its assignor when the assignment came after the DJ action began) bars the provider's action by res judicata; a provider not named, or whose assignment predates the DJ action, is not bound; an order that makes no declaration, or a DJ that does not cover the accident or claims, has no preclusive effect. The Second Department Appellate Division (Hereford v Shelly, 2025) applies res judicata to an unvacated default DJ to stay a later arbitration by claimants who were parties. Decisions differ in outcomes, not in the rule. The one point of internal nuance is collateral estoppel after a default: available only if the provider appeared in the DJ action (Parisien v Kemper, 2022; Nasrinpay, 2024), while res judicata applies to a default DJ regardless. - Page: https://www.beynensonlaw.com/no-fault-topics/declaratory-judgment/ ## Leading authorities - [Matter of Hereford Ins. Co. v Shelly (2025 NY Slip Op 05681)](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/matter-of-hereford-ins-co-v-shelly-2025-ny-slip-op-05681/) — Appellate Division, Second Department, 2025. Unvacated default DJ is res judicata against claimants who were parties: A default declaratory judgment declaring that the insurer had no duty to pay claims from the accident and was entitled to a permanent stay of arbitrations barred, by res judicata, the claimants' later demand for (uninsured motorist) arbitration; the permanent stay was properly granted. - [EBM Med. Health Care, P.C. v Republic W. Ins. (2012 NY Slip Op 22300)](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/ebm-med-health-care-p-c-v-republic-w-ins-2012-ny-slip-op-22300/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2012. Default DJ bars the named provider's pending action (res judicata): After the provider sued in Civil Court, the insurer obtained a default DJ declaring the provider not properly licensed and that the insurer owed it no benefits 'arising out of any current or future proceeding'. The pending action was a 'current' proceeding, so it was barred by res judicata; the Civil Court's denial of the insurer's summary judgment motion was reversed. - [Magic Recovery Med. & Surgical Supply Inc. v State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. (2010 NY Slip Op 20130)](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/magic-recovery-med-surgical-supply-inc-v-state-farm-mut-auto-ins-co-2010-ny-slip-op-20130/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2010. Provider not named and not in privity is not bound: Default DJs absolving the insurer as to staged incidents did not bind a provider that was not named or served and whose assignments predated the DJ actions; and a default DJ has no collateral estoppel effect because nothing was actually litigated. Golia, J.P., dissented. - [Metro Health Prods., Inc. v Nationwide Ins. (2015 NY Slip Op 25203)](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/metro-health-prods-inc-v-nationwide-ins-2015-ny-slip-op-25203/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2015. Order granting default without a declaration has no preclusive effect: A Supreme Court order granting the insurer's unopposed default motion and directing it to settle a judgment on notice made no declaration of the parties' rights, so it was not a conclusive final determination and did not bar the provider's action. - [Pomona Med. Diagnostics, P.C. v Metropolitan Cas. Ins. Co. (2010 NY Slip Op 52039(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/pomona-med-diagnostics-p-c-v-metropolitan-cas-ins-co-2010-ny-slip-op52039u/) — Appellate Term, First Department, 2010. First Department: default DJ against provider bars its action: A Supreme Court judgment, entered on the provider's default, declaring that the insurer may deny all claims from the assignor's accident barred the provider's actions by res judicata; the insurer's summary judgment motions should have been granted. - [Compas Med., P.C. v Geico Ins. Co. (2013 NY Slip Op 52016(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/compas-med-p-c-v-geico-ins-co-2013-ny-slip-op-52016u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2013. Civil Court may stay provider action pending insurer's DJ action: The Civil Court did not improvidently exercise its CPLR 2201 discretion in staying a provider's action pending final determination of the insurer's Supreme Court declaratory judgment action, in which the provider and its assignor were named defendants. - Gramatan Home Invs. Corp. v Lopez, 46 NY2d 481 (not in the database). Assignee is in privity with (and bound by a judgment against) its assignor only if the action against the assignor was commenced before the assignment; basis of the non-party limit. - Schuylkill Fuel Corp. v Nieberg Realty Corp., 250 NY 304, 306-307 (not in the database). Res judicata applies where a different judgment in the second action would destroy or impair rights established by the first; quoted in nearly every 'barred' decision. - Kaufman v Eli Lilly & Co., 65 NY2d 449, 456-457 (not in the database). An issue is not actually litigated where there has been a default; limits collateral estoppel (not res judicata) from default DJs. - Matter of Hunter, 4 NY3d 260, 269 (not in the database). General transactional res judicata rule cited by the Appellate Terms. - Hirsch v Lindor Realty Corp., 63 NY2d 878, 881 (not in the database). A court deciding a DJ action must make a declaration of the parties' rights; basis of the 'no declaration, no preclusion' limit. - Lazides v P & G Enters., 58 AD3d 607 (not in the database). Res judicata applies to an unvacated default judgment; cited for default DJs. - Matter of Eagle Ins. Co. v Facey, 272 AD2d 399 (not in the database). Default judgment has res judicata effect; cited in EBM and Ava. - Chestnut Hill Real Estate v Contractors Cas. & Sur. Co., 280 AD2d 446 (not in the database). Relief from a judgment may only be sought from the court that rendered it; why a Supreme Court DJ cannot vacate a Civil Court judgment (Master Cheng, Bronx Med. Diagnostic). - Trisingh Enters., Inc. v Kessler, 249 AD2d 45 (not in the database). First Department authority that res judicata applies to an unvacated default judgment (cited in Pomona). - State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v Anikeyeva, 130 AD3d 1007 (not in the database). Affirmed a default DJ that PCs were unlawfully incorporated; not in the database (the 2011 and 2021 Anikeyeva decisions are). ## Categories - **Barred by DJ**: The court holds that the DJ (or order in the DJ action) precludes the claimant's action, arbitration or judgment: the complaint is dismissed or summary judgment is granted to the insurer under res judicata or collateral estoppel, the claimant's motion is denied because of the DJ, the action or arbitration is permanently stayed on the strength of the DJ, or the DJ is held to be a meritorious defense supporting vacatur of the claimant's default judgment. Includes holdings that a default DJ is a conclusive final determination, that a pending action is a 'current' proceeding within the DJ's terms, and decisions taking judicial notice of the DJ on appeal and dismissing on that basis. - **Barred in part**: The court applies the DJ to some bills, dates of service, assignors or causes of action and expressly holds that other claims in the same action fall outside it (e.g. a bill not listed in the DJ's schedule, an assignor not covered, a separate claim for interest and attorney's fees), so the action survives as to those. - **Not bound: parties**: The court refuses preclusion because the identity-of-parties element fails: the provider was not named or served in the DJ action; the provider is not in privity with its named assignor because the assignment was made before the DJ action was commenced (Gramatan); the provider never appeared, so a default DJ cannot have collateral estoppel effect for lack of a full and fair opportunity to litigate; or the insurer relying on the DJ was not shown to be the DJ plaintiff or in privity with it (different corporate entity, different claim number). - **DJ does not reach**: The court refuses preclusion for a reason about the DJ itself: it covers a different accident date, claim, assignor or time period, or only future/past actions; the order merely grants a default motion or directs settlement of a judgment without declaring the parties' rights; the ruling is not a final determination on the merits (e.g. denial of summary judgment in the DJ action); the DJ was vacated, was issued by a court without subject-matter jurisdiction (Civil Court DJ, CCA 212-a), or is a sister-state default not entitled to recognition; the insurer failed to prove the DJ's terms or that the services are within it; or the DJ cannot vacate or undo a judgment already entered or an arbitration award already rendered. - **Stayed pending DJ**: No final DJ governs yet, and the court stays the no-fault action (CPLR 2201), enjoins pending or future suits or arbitrations, upholds such a stay, or stays the action to let the claimant move to vacate a default DJ, pending the outcome of the DJ action. Includes a DJ court's preliminary injunction against the claimant's collection suits pending determination. - **Stay denied**: The court refuses to stay or adjourn the claimant's action pending the insurer's DJ action, vacates such a stay, or holds that an interim stay or injunction issued in the DJ action does not affect the claimant's action or judgment (e.g. it was entered after the claimant's judgment, or ended when the DJ was entered without a disposition against the claimant). ## Decisions (162) Highest court first, then department, newest first. Each entry: court and date, the category, [central] where the result turns on this question or [also decides], then a one-sentence summary written by a language model from the decision and checked by a second reading. ### Appellate Division, Second Department - [Matter of Hereford Ins. Co. v Shelly (2025 NY Slip Op 05681)](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/matter-of-hereford-ins-co-v-shelly-2025-ny-slip-op-05681/) — Appellate Division, Second Department, 2025-10-15 — Barred by DJ [central]: Upheld a permanent stay of the claimants' uninsured motorist arbitration because an unvacated default declaratory judgment, to which they were parties, declared the insurer owed no claims from the accident and was entitled to stay arbitrations. - [State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v Anikeyeva (2021 NY Slip Op 04728)](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/state-farm-mut-auto-ins-co-v-anikeyeva-2021-ny-slip-op-04728/) — Appellate Division, Second Department, 2021-08-18 — Stayed pending DJ [central]: Upheld a preliminary injunction in the insurer's declaratory action restraining enforcement of the provider's earlier Civil Court judgment, because the judgment was obtained as part of a larger fraudulent scheme. ### Appellate Term, First Department - [New Capital 1 Inc. v Kemper Independence Ins. Co. (2022 NY Slip Op 51033(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/new-capital-1-inc-v-kemper-independence-ins-co-2022-ny-slip-op51033u/) — Appellate Term, First Department, 2022-10-24 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the action barred by res judicata because a judgment in the insurer's action declared no duty to pay the provider's claims for the assignor's accident, and an unvacated default judgment is a conclusive final determination. - [Hereford Ins. Co. v Iconic Wellness Surgical Servs., LLC (2019 NY Slip Op 50801(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/hereford-ins-co-v-iconic-wellness-surgical-servs-llc-2019-ny-slip-op50801u/) — Appellate Term, First Department, 2019-05-23 — DJ does not reach [central]: Reinstated the master arbitrator's award, holding that a Supreme Court declaration of no liability issued after the arbitration is not a ground for vacating an arbitration award. - [Quality Psychological Servs. v Infinity Prop. & Cas. Co. (2015 NY Slip Op 50645(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/quality-psychological-servs-v-infinity-prop-cas-co-2015-ny-slip-op-50645u/) — Appellate Term, First Department, 2015-04-29 — Not bound: parties [also decides]: Held, as an alternative to finding the argument unpreserved, that the provider was not bound by a Pennsylvania order rescinding the policy because it was not a party and was not shown in privity with its assignor when that action began. - [Ideal Med. Supply v Mercury Cas. Ins. Co. (2013 NY Slip Op 23068)](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/ideal-med-supply-v-mercury-cas-ins-co-2013-ny-slip-op-23068/) — Appellate Term, First Department, 2013-03-12 — Not bound: parties [central]: Held the provider was not bound by the Supreme Court declaration because it was not a party to the declaratory action, and was not in privity with its named assignor since the assignment predated that action. - [Pomona Med. Diagnostics, P.C. v Metropolitan Cas. Ins. Co. (2010 NY Slip Op 52039(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/pomona-med-diagnostics-p-c-v-metropolitan-cas-ins-co-2010-ny-slip-op52039u/) — Appellate Term, First Department, 2010-11-26 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the Supreme Court judgment, entered on the provider's default, declaring that the insurer may deny all claims from the assignor's accident barred the provider's actions by res judicata. ### Appellate Term, Second Department - [New Image Chiropractic, P.C. v Kemper Ins. Co. (2026 NY Slip Op 51306(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/new-image-chiropractic-p-c-v-kemper-ins-co-2026-ny-slip-op-51306u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2026-06-17 — Not bound: parties [central]: Held the default declaratory judgment obtained by a different insurer entity had no res judicata effect absent proof it was the defendant, and no collateral estoppel because the provider never appeared. - [Burke 2 Physical Therapy, P.C. v State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. (2025 NY Slip Op 51152(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/burke-2-physical-therapy-p-c-v-state-farm-mut-auto-ins-co-2025-ny-slip-op-51152u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2025-06-20 — DJ does not reach [also decides]: Rejected the provider's collateral estoppel argument because the Supreme Court's denial of the insurer's summary judgment motion in the declaratory judgment action was not a final determination on the merits. - [Burke Physical Therapy, P.C. v State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. (2025 NY Slip Op 50845(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/burke-physical-therapy-p-c-v-state-farm-mut-auto-ins-co-2025-ny-slipop-50845u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2025-05-16 — DJ does not reach [also decides]: Held that the denial of the insurer's summary judgment motion in its declaratory judgment action had no preclusive effect because it was not a final determination on the merits. - [Burke Physical Therapy, P.C. v State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. (2025 NY Slip Op 50836(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/burke-physical-therapy-p-c-v-state-farm-mut-auto-ins-co-2025-ny-slipop-50836u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2025-05-16 — DJ does not reach [also decides]: Rejected the provider's argument that the denial of the insurer's summary judgment motion in its declaratory judgment action precluded the defense, because that denial was not a final determination on the merits. - [Horizon P.T. Care, P.C. v Kemper Ins. Co. (2025 NY Slip Op 50823(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/horizon-p-t-care-p-c-v-kemper-ins-co-2025-ny-slip-op50823u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2025-05-02 — Not bound: parties [central]: Held the insurer failed to show that the entity that obtained the default declaratory judgment was the proper insurer, so it did not establish at this juncture a final adjudication between the same parties; collateral estoppel was unpreserved. - [Ahmed Med. Care, P.C. v State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. (2025 NY Slip Op 50825(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/ahmed-med-care-p-c-v-state-farm-mut-auto-ins-co-2025-ny-slip-op50825u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2025-05-02 — Barred in part [central]: Held seven causes of action barred by res judicata under a default declaratory judgment listing those bills, but reinstated the cause of action for a bill not in the judgment and the claim for interest and attorney's fees. - [Burke 2 Physical Therapy, P.C. v State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. (2025 NY Slip Op 50306(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/burke-2-physical-therapy-p-c-v-state-farm-mut-auto-ins-co-2025-ny-slip-op-50306u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2025-03-07 — DJ does not reach [also decides]: Noted that the denial of the insurer's summary judgment motion in its declaratory judgment action had no preclusive effect, because it was not a final determination on the merits. - [Burke Physical Therapy, P.C. v State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. (2025 NY Slip Op 50194(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/burke-physical-therapy-p-c-v-state-farm-mut-auto-ins-co-2025-ny-slip-op-50194u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2025-02-14 — DJ does not reach [also decides]: Held the denial of the insurer's summary judgment motion in its declaratory judgment action had no preclusive effect, because it was not a final determination on the merits. - [Burke 2 Physical Therapy, P.C. v State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. (2025 NY Slip Op 50195(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/burke-2-physical-therapy-p-c-v-state-farm-mut-auto-ins-co-2025-ny-slip-op-50195u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2025-02-14 — DJ does not reach [also decides]: Held that the denial of the insurer's summary judgment motion in its Supreme Court declaratory judgment action had no preclusive effect because it was not a final determination on the merits. - [Burke Physical Therapy, P.C. v State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. (2025 NY Slip Op 50196(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/burke-physical-therapy-p-c-v-state-farm-mut-auto-ins-co-2025-ny-slip-op-50196u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2025-02-14 — DJ does not reach [also decides]: Held that the denial of the insurer's summary judgment motion in its declaratory judgment action had no preclusive effect because it was not a final determination on the merits. - [Trinity Medicine, P.C. v National Gen. Ins. Co. (2025 NY Slip Op 50197(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/trinity-medicine-p-c-v-national-gen-ins-co-2025-ny-slip-op-50197u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2025-02-14 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the insurer's default declaratory judgment, declaring no coverage for the assignor's intentional accident, a conclusive final determination barring the action by res judicata, and so a meritorious defense supporting vacatur of the insurer's answering default. - [Trapezius Diagnostic Chiropractic, P.C. v Adirondack Ins. Exch. (2025 NY Slip Op 50173(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/trapezius-diagnostic-chiropractic-p-c-v-adirondack-ins-exch-2025-ny-slip-op-50173u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2025-01-17 — DJ does not reach [central]: Held the insurer failed to show the action concerned the accident date covered by the default declaratory judgment, so neither res judicata nor collateral estoppel was established. - [Nasrinpay v National Gen. Ins. Co. (2024 NY Slip Op 51188(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/nasrinpay-v-national-gen-ins-co-2024-ny-slip-op-51188u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2024-08-13 — Not bound: parties [central]: Held the default declaratory judgment had no res judicata effect because a different entity obtained it and was not shown to be the defendant, and no collateral estoppel because the provider never appeared. - [Burke Physical Therapy, P.C. v State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. (2024 NY Slip Op 50803(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/burke-physical-therapy-p-c-v-state-farm-mut-auto-ins-co-2024-ny-slipop-50803u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2024-06-14 — DJ does not reach [also decides]: Held that the denial of the insurer's summary judgment motion in its Supreme Court declaratory judgment action had no preclusive effect here because it was not a final determination on the merits. - [Burke Physical Therapy, P.C. v State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. (2024 NY Slip Op 24111)](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/burke-physical-therapy-p-c-v-state-farm-mut-auto-ins-co-2024-ny-slip-op-24111/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2024-03-15 — DJ does not reach [also decides]: Held that the denial of the insurer's summary judgment motion in its declaratory judgment action had no preclusive effect, because it was not a final determination on the merits. - [Blano Med., P.C. v Hertz Co. (2023 NY Slip Op 51406(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/blano-med-p-c-v-hertz-co-2023-ny-slip-op-51406u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2023-12-15 — Not bound: parties [central]: Held the default declaratory judgment obtained by a different Hertz entity did not bar the action because the defendant failed to show that entity was the proper defendant. - [Parisien v Avis Car Rental, LLC (2023 NY Slip Op 50891(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/parisien-v-avis-car-rental-llc-2023-ny-slip-op-50891u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2023-08-04 — DJ does not reach [central]: Held the earlier declaratory judgment order did not bar or permanently stay the action, because it covered actions from an earlier accident and could not decide the provider's eligibility for later services in an action commenced afterward. - [Shafai Acupuncture, P.C. v State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. (2023 NY Slip Op 50795(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/shafai-acupuncture-p-c-v-state-farm-mut-auto-ins-co-2023-ny-slip-op50795u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2023-07-21 — Barred by DJ [also decides]: Held one cause of action barred by res judicata because the insurer showed the assignor, accident date and date of service matched the claim covered by its Supreme Court declaratory judgment against the provider. - [Horizon P.T. Care, P.C. v State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. (2023 NY Slip Op 50442(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/horizon-p-t-care-p-c-v-state-farm-mut-auto-ins-co-2023-ny-slip-op50442u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2023-04-14 — Barred by DJ [also decides]: Held four causes of action, matching the assignor, claims, loss date and service dates in the insurer's default declaratory judgment against the provider, barred by res judicata. - [Horizon P.T. Care, P.C. v State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. (2023 NY Slip Op 50295(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/horizon-p-t-care-p-c-v-state-farm-mut-auto-ins-co-2023-ny-slip-op50295u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2023-03-24 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the action barred by res judicata because the unvacated default declaratory judgment covered the same assignor, date of loss and dates of service, the differing amounts being explained as claim-form arithmetic errors. - [Ahmed Med. Care, P.C. v State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. (2023 NY Slip Op 50276(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/ahmed-med-care-p-c-v-state-farm-mut-auto-ins-co-2023-ny-slip-op50276u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2023-02-24 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held five causes of action barred by res judicata because the unvacated default declaratory judgment, a final adjudication on the merits, covered the same assignor, claims, date of loss and dates of service; the chart's legibility objection failed. - [Ahmed Med. Care, P.C. v State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. (2023 NY Slip Op 50275(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/ahmed-med-care-p-c-v-state-farm-mut-auto-ins-co-2023-ny-slip-op50275u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2023-02-24 — Barred by DJ [central]: Affirmed dismissal of the four causes of action listed in the insurer's unvacated default declaratory judgment as barred by res judicata and/or collateral estoppel, for the reasons given in the companion appeal. - [Medical Supply of NY Corp. v Nationwide Ins. Co. (2022 NY Slip Op 51253(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/medical-supply-of-ny-corp-v-nationwide-ins-co-2022-ny-slip-op51253u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2022-12-02 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the action barred by res judicata because the default declaratory judgment covered the same claim number and accident; the complaint's different accident date, unsupported by personal knowledge, did not rebut documents showing the same accident. - [Healthwise Med. Assoc., P.C. v Nationwide Ins. (2022 NY Slip Op 51251(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/healthwise-med-assoc-p-c-v-nationwide-ins-2022-ny-slip-op51251u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2022-12-02 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the default declaratory judgment obtained against the provider and its assignor res judicata on the action because the insurer submitted sufficient evidence that it was the proper insurer under the same claim number. - [Parisien v Zipcar (2022 NY Slip Op 51245(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/parisien-v-zipcar-2022-ny-slip-op-51245u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2022-11-25 — DJ does not reach [central]: Held the declaratory judgment order did not bar the action because it covered a different accident, could not be extended to future actions, and a recovery here would not impair the rights it established. - [Parisien v Kemper Ins. Co. (2022 NY Slip Op 51240(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/parisien-v-kemper-ins-co-2022-ny-slip-op-51240u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2022-11-18 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the action barred by res judicata because the declaratory judgment against the provider covered the same accident and the insurer that obtained it sufficiently showed it was the proper defendant. - [Shafai Acupuncture, P.C. v State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. (2022 NY Slip Op 50907(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/shafai-acupuncture-p-c-v-state-farm-mut-auto-ins-co-2022-ny-slip-op50907u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2022-08-19 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the cross motion to dismiss should be granted on res judicata because the declaratory judgment declared the provider had no right to payment of the bills at issue for failing to appear for examinations under oath. - [Laga v Unitrin Auto & Home Ins. Co. (2022 NY Slip Op 50906(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/laga-v-unitrin-auto-home-ins-co-2022-ny-slip-op-50906u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2022-08-19 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the action barred by collateral estoppel because the declaratory judgment decided the identical entitlement issue for the same accident and the provider, which appeared and opposed there, had a full and fair opportunity to litigate. - [Hand By Hand, PT, P.C. v New York Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co. (2022 NY Slip Op 50774(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/hand-by-hand-pt-p-c-v-new-york-cent-mut-fire-ins-co-2022-ny-slip-op50774u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2022-07-22 — Stay denied [also decides]: Held the injunction issued in the declaratory judgment action did not bar the action because it was entered after the provider's default judgment and ended when the declaratory judgment was entered without any disposition against the provider. - [Parisien v Kemper Ins. Co. (2022 NY Slip Op 22260)](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/parisien-v-kemper-ins-co-2022-ny-slip-op-22260/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2022-07-22 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the provider's action barred by collateral estoppel because the DJ order declared no coverage for the accident regardless of provider, the provider had appeared and answered there, and privity with the DJ plaintiff was unnecessary. - [Ahava Med. Diagnostic, P.C. v Hertz Co. (2022 NY Slip Op 50298(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/ahava-med-diagnostic-p-c-v-hertz-co-2022-ny-slip-op-50298u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2022-04-01 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held a declaratory judgment entered before the provider's default judgment was a meritorious defense supporting vacatur and barred the action by res judicata, although notice of entry was served after the default judgment. - [North Val. Med., P.C. v Permanent Gen. Assur. Corp. (2022 NY Slip Op 50048(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/north-val-med-p-c-v-permanent-gen-assur-corp-2022-ny-slip-op-50048u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2022-01-21 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the provider's action barred by res judicata because the unvacated default declaratory judgment against the provider and its assignor was a conclusive final determination that a recovery here would impair. - [Loyalty Physical Therapy, P.T., P.C. v Permanent Gen. Assur. Corp. (2022 NY Slip Op 50049(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/loyalty-physical-therapy-p-t-p-c-v-permanent-gen-assur-corp-2022-ny-slip-op-50049u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2022-01-21 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the provider's action barred by res judicata because of the default order in the insurer's declaratory judgment action against the provider and its assignor, adopting the companion appeal's reasoning. - [Blackman v 21st Century Ins. Co. (2021 NY Slip Op 50771(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/blackman-v-21st-century-ins-co-2021-ny-slip-op-50771u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2021-07-30 — Barred by DJ [central]: Took judicial notice of the DJ declaring the insurer owed the provider nothing in any current or future proceeding and upheld dismissal under res judicata, although the order submitted below had not itself declared rights. - [Solution Bridge, Inc. v GEICO Ins. Co. (2021 NY Slip Op 50731(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/solution-bridge-inc-v-geico-ins-co-2021-ny-slip-op-50731u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2021-07-23 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the provider's action barred by res judicata because any judgment for it would destroy or impair rights established by the insurer's Supreme Court declaratory judgment. - [New Millennium Med. Imaging, P.C. v Repwest Ins. Co. (2021 NY Slip Op 50577(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/new-millennium-med-imaging-p-c-v-repwest-ins-co-2021-ny-slip-op50577u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2021-06-21 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the action barred by res judicata because the assignors' own documents and testimony showed the claim arose from the accident covered by the default DJ, and the provider's differing date on its own claim forms raised no issue. - [First Care Med. Equip., LLC v Encompass Ins. (2021 NY Slip Op 50326(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/first-care-med-equip-llc-v-encompass-ins-2021-ny-slip-op-50326u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2021-04-16 — DJ does not reach [central]: Held the action not barred because the DJ covered only services for which an EUO was requested and the provider failed to appear, and the insurer did not show the services at issue fell within it. - [Diagnostic Imaging of Rockville Ctr., PC v Kemper Independence Ins. Co. (2021 NY Slip Op 50238(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/diagnostic-imaging-of-rockville-ctr-pc-v-kemper-independence-ins-co-2021-nyslip-op-50238u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2021-03-18 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the provider's action barred by res judicata because the unvacated default DJ, declaring no duty to pay the provider and assignor for the accident and claim number, was a conclusive final determination. - [RX Warehouse Pharm., Inc. v 21st Century Ins. Co. (2021 NY Slip Op 50151(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/rx-warehouse-pharm-inc-v-21st-century-ins-co-2021-ny-slip-op50151u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2021-02-26 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the default order in the DJ action barred the provider's action by res judicata because, by defaulting, the provider admitted the staged-accident allegations, so a judgment for it would impair rights established there. - [Quality Health Supply Corp. v Hertz Co. (2021 NY Slip Op 50130(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/quality-health-supply-corp-v-hertz-co-2021-ny-slip-op-50130u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2021-02-19 — Not bound: parties [central]: Denied dismissal on res judicata grounds based on a default declaration obtained by a differently named Hertz entity, adopting the reasoning of a companion appeal. - [Allay Med. Servs., P.C. v Nationwide Ins. (2021 NY Slip Op 50087(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/allay-med-servs-p-c-v-nationwide-ins-2021-ny-slip-op-50087u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2021-02-05 — Barred by DJ [central]: Granted dismissal under res judicata based on a default DJ declaring the insurer owed nothing on the listed claims, which identified this claim number and accident, applying the reasoning of the companion appeal. - [Allay Med. Servs., P.C. v Nationwide Ins. (2021 NY Slip Op 50086(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/allay-med-servs-p-c-v-nationwide-ins-2021-ny-slip-op-50086u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2021-02-05 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the provider's action barred by res judicata because a default Supreme Court declaratory judgment against it covered the identical claim number and accident date, so summary judgment dismissing the complaint was granted. - [Triborough Psychiatric v State Farm Mut. Ins. Co. (2021 NY Slip Op 50084(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/triborough-psychiatric-v-state-farm-mut-ins-co-2021-ny-slip-op50084u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2021-02-05 — Not bound: parties [central]: Held the default declaratory judgment against the assignor had no collateral estoppel effect because nothing was actually litigated, and the provider, whose assignment and suit predated the declaratory action, was not in privity with the assignor. - [ZG Chiropractic Care, P.C. v 21st Century Ins. Co. (2021 NY Slip Op 50079(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/zg-chiropractic-care-p-c-v-21st-century-ins-co-2021-ny-slip-op50079u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2021-02-05 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held a judicially noticed declaratory judgment declaring the accident intentional and the insurer owing no coverage was a conclusive merits determination that supplied a meritorious defense and barred the action by res judicata. - [J.C. Healing Touch Rehab, P.C. v 21st Century Ins. Co. (2020 NY Slip Op 51296(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/j-c-healing-touch-rehab-p-c-v-21st-century-ins-co-2020-ny-slip-op51296u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2020-10-30 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held that the insurer's later motion introducing a Supreme Court judgment declaring no coverage for the collision should have been granted under res judicata, excusing the omission of the defense from the answer because the DJ postdated it. - [New Age Acupuncture, P.C. v Global Liberty Ins. Co. (2020 NY Slip Op 51225(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/new-age-acupuncture-p-c-v-global-liberty-ins-co-2020-ny-slip-op51225u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2020-10-16 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the insurer's motion to open its calendar default and dismiss should have been granted because a Supreme Court order and judgment declared it had no obligation to pay the provider for claims from the accident. - [Quality Health Supply Corp. v Hertz Co. (2020 NY Slip Op 50996(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/quality-health-supply-corp-v-hertz-co-2020-ny-slip-op-50996u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2020-08-28 — Not bound: parties [central]: Held the default declaratory judgment obtained by a different Hertz entity did not bar the action because the defendant failed to show that entity was the proper party. - [Mira Acupuncture, P.C. v 21st Century Ins. Co. (2020 NY Slip Op 50853(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/mira-acupuncture-p-c-v-21st-century-ins-co-2020-ny-slip-op50853u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2020-07-10 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the insurer entitled to summary judgment dismissing the complaint because a Supreme Court declaratory judgment declared no duty to provide coverage for the accident, for the reasons stated in a companion appeal. - [Enjoy Rehab, P.T., P.C. v 21st Century Ins. Co. (2020 NY Slip Op 50852(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/enjoy-rehab-p-t-p-c-v-21st-century-ins-co-2020-ny-slip-op50852u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2020-07-10 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the insurer entitled to summary judgment dismissing the complaint because a Supreme Court declaratory judgment declared no duty to provide coverage for the accident, for the reasons stated in a companion appeal. - [St. Mark's Med. Health Care, PLLC v 21st Century Ins. Co. (2020 NY Slip Op 50851(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/st-marks-med-health-care-pllc-v-21st-century-ins-co-2020-ny-slip-op50851u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2020-07-10 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the provider's action barred by res judicata because an unvacated default declaratory judgment against the provider and its assignor declared no duty to cover the accident, so any recovery would impair rights it established. - [Freedom Chiropractic, P.C. v 21st Century Ins. Co. (2020 NY Slip Op 50686(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/freedom-chiropractic-p-c-v-21st-century-ins-co-2020-ny-slip-op50686u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2020-06-05 — Barred by DJ [also decides]: Held, as an alternative ground, that the default declaratory judgment declaring the insurer not obligated to pay the provider for the accident conclusively determined the claim and supplied a meritorious defense supporting vacatur and dismissal. - [Wave Med. Servs., P.C. v Farmers New Century Ins. Co. (2020 NY Slip Op 50555(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/wave-med-servs-p-c-v-farmers-new-century-ins-co-2020-ny-slip-op50555u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2020-05-15 — Barred by DJ [central]: Took judicial notice of a Supreme Court judgment declaring that the insurer owed the provider nothing in any current proceeding, and affirmed dismissal on that basis although the order relied on below had made no declaration. - [Longevity Med. Supply, Inc. v Global Liberty Ins. Co. (2020 NY Slip Op 50527(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/longevity-med-supply-inc-v-global-liberty-ins-co-2020-ny-slip-op50527u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2020-05-08 — Barred by DJ [central]: Took judicial notice on appeal of a Supreme Court declaratory judgment declaring the provider and assignor not entitled to benefits for the accident and staying all matters, and dismissed the complaint on that basis. - [Master Cheng Acupuncture, P.C. v Global Liberty Ins. of N.Y. (2020 NY Slip Op 50404(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/master-cheng-acupuncture-p-c-v-global-liberty-ins-of-n-y-2020-ny-slipop-50404u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2020-03-13 — DJ does not reach [central]: Held the provider's existing Civil Court judgment could not be vacated on the strength of a later declaratory judgment purporting to vacate it, because relief from a judgment may be sought only from the court that rendered it. - [Gentlecare Ambulatory Anesthesia Servs.; Lyonel F. Paul, M.D. v American Ind. Ins. Co. (2019 NY Slip Op 52044(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/gentlecare-ambulatory-anesthesia-servs-lyonel-f-paul-m-d-v-american-ind-ins-co-2019-ny-slip-op-52044u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2019-12-13 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the provider barred by a Supreme Court judgment entered after trial against it, judicially noticed, although the earlier default DJ did not bind it because it was not named and privity with its assignor was not shown. - [Gentlecare Ambulatory Anesthesia Servs.; Lyonel F. Paul, M.D. v American Ind. Ins. Co. (2019 NY Slip Op 52043(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/gentlecare-ambulatory-anesthesia-servs-lyonel-f-paul-m-d-v-american-ind-ins-co-2019-ny-slip-op-52043u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2019-12-13 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the provider barred by a Supreme Court judgment entered after trial against it, judicially noticed, although the earlier default DJ did not bind it because it was not named and privity with its assignor was not shown. - [Active Care Med. Supply Corp. v MVAIC (2019 NY Slip Op 52045(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/active-care-med-supply-corp-v-mvaic-2019-ny-slip-op-52045u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2019-12-13 — Not bound: parties [also decides]: Held MVAIC could not amend to assert collateral estoppel from other proceedings because the provider was not named in them and was not then in privity with anyone who was. - [Tisbury Psychological Servs., P.C. v Warner Ins. Co. (2019 NY Slip Op 51957(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/tisbury-psychological-servs-p-c-v-warner-ins-co-2019-ny-slip-op51957u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2019-11-29 — Stay denied [central]: Affirmed, for the reasons stated in a companion decision, the denial of the insurer's request to adjourn trial pending its declaratory judgment action, where the parties had stipulated to no further motion practice. - [XVV, Inc. v Warner Ins. Co. (2019 NY Slip Op 51955(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/xvv-inc-v-warner-ins-co-2019-ny-slip-op-51955u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2019-11-29 — Stay denied [central]: Upheld the denial of the insurer's request to adjourn trial pending its declaratory judgment action, because the parties had stipulated to no further motion practice and the outcome of that action was unknown. - [NR Acupuncture, P.C. v Ocean Harbor Cas. Ins. Co. (2019 NY Slip Op 51892(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/nr-acupuncture-p-c-v-ocean-harbor-cas-ins-co-2019-ny-slip-op51892u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2019-11-22 — Not bound: parties [also decides]: Rejected the insurer's res judicata ground based on Florida default declaratory orders because the provider was neither named nor served and its assignment predated the declaratory action, so it had no full and fair opportunity to defend. - [Bronx Med. Diagnostic, P.C. v Global Liberty Ins. of N.Y. (2019 NY Slip Op 51842(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/bronx-med-diagnostic-p-c-v-global-liberty-ins-of-n-y-2019-ny-slip-op51842u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2019-11-15 — DJ does not reach [central]: Held that a Supreme Court order in the insurer's declaratory action permanently staying suits and vacating judgments could not undo a Civil Court judgment, because only the rendering court may vacate it and summary judgment had already been granted before that order. - [Charles Deng Acupuncture, P.C. v Allstate Ins. Co. (2019 NY Slip Op 51358(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/charles-deng-acupuncture-p-c-v-allstate-ins-co-2019-ny-slip-op51358u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2019-08-16 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the provider's action barred by res judicata because a Supreme Court order, granted on default against the provider and its assignor, declared the accident staged and the insurer not liable, and a recovery would impair that order. - [TAM Med. Supply Corp. v Kemper Ins. Co. (2019 NY Slip Op 51314(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/tam-med-supply-corp-v-kemper-ins-co-2019-ny-slip-op-51314u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2019-08-09 — Barred by DJ [central]: Affirmed dismissal because a Supreme Court order in the insurer's declaratory action, naming the provider and its assignor, declared no obligation to pay claims from the accident and so barred the provider's action. - [TAM Med. Supply Corp. v Kemper Ins. Co. (2019 NY Slip Op 51313(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/tam-med-supply-corp-v-kemper-ins-co-2019-ny-slip-op-51313u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2019-08-09 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the provider's action barred by res judicata because the Supreme Court's summary judgment order in the insurer's declaratory action, naming the provider, conclusively determined that the insurer owed nothing for the accident. - [Valdan Acupuncture, P.C. v Nationwide Mut. Fire Ins. Co. (2019 NY Slip Op 51098(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/valdan-acupuncture-p-c-v-nationwide-mut-fire-ins-co-2019-ny-slip-op51098u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2019-06-28 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the provider's action barred by the Supreme Court's no-coverage declaration although the provider was not named, because the assignment was made after the declaratory action began, so the provider was in privity with its assignor. - [Gentlecare Ambulatory Anesthesia Servs. v MVAIC (2019 NY Slip Op 51039(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/gentlecare-ambulatory-anesthesia-servs-v-mvaic-2019-ny-slip-op-51039u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2019-03-01 — Not bound: parties [central]: Held the declaration did not support dismissal because the provider was neither named nor served and its assignment predated the declaratory action, so it was not in privity and had no full and fair opportunity to litigate. - [Atlantic Chiropractic, P.C. v Utica Mut. Ins. Co. (2019 NY Slip Op 50173(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/atlantic-chiropractic-p-c-v-utica-mut-ins-co-2019-ny-slip-op50173u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2019-02-08 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held that a default declaratory judgment against the provider and its assignor, declaring the accident staged and uncovered, barred the earlier-commenced action by res judicata; the defense was not waived, since it arose only when the judgment was entered. - [Maiga Prods. Corp. v Hertz Co. (2018 NY Slip Op 51448(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/maiga-prods-corp-v-hertz-co-2018-ny-slip-op-51448u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2018-10-12 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held, on judicial notice of a Supreme Court order declaring no obligation to pay any current or future claim from the accident for EUO nonappearance, that the action was barred and dismissed. - [Jamaica Wellness Med., P.C. v Mercury Cas. Co. (2018 NY Slip Op 51128(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/jamaica-wellness-med-p-c-v-mercury-cas-co-2018-ny-slip-op-51128u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2018-07-13 — DJ does not reach [central]: Held the Supreme Court order had no preclusive effect because it merely granted a default judgment against the assignor without declaring the insurer's rights against the provider, so it was not a conclusive final determination. - [Maxford, Inc. v Erie Ins. Co. of N.Y. (2018 NY Slip Op 51057(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/maxford-inc-v-erie-ins-co-of-n-y-2018-ny-slip-op-51057u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2018-06-29 — Not bound: parties [also decides]: Rejected collateral estoppel based on a default order, in the insurer's action against the assignor, finding material misrepresentations in the policy application, because the provider was not named in that action and was not in privity with the assignor. - [Healing Art Acupuncture, P.C. v 21st Century Ins. Co. (2018 NY Slip Op 50583(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/healing-art-acupuncture-p-c-v-21st-century-ins-co-2018-ny-slip-op50583u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2018-04-13 — Barred by DJ [central]: Took judicial notice of the Supreme Court orders and judgment declaring no coverage for the staged accident and held the provider's action barred by res judicata and collateral estoppel, awarding the insurer reverse summary judgment. - [Active Care Med. Supply Corp. v Amica Mut. Ins. Co. (2018 NY Slip Op 50500(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/active-care-med-supply-corp-v-amica-mut-ins-co-2018-ny-slip-op50500u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2018-04-06 — Not bound: parties [central]: Held the declaratory judgment was not res judicata because the provider was neither named nor served and its assignment predated the action, so it lacked privity and a full and fair opportunity to defend. - [Active Chiropractic, P.C. v Allstate Ins. (2018 NY Slip Op 50203(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/active-chiropractic-p-c-v-allstate-ins-2018-ny-slip-op-50203u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2018-02-09 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the provider's action barred by res judicata because a default Supreme Court order declared the insurer owed no coverage for the accident, deeming the answer amended to plead the defense. - [Active Chiropractic, P.C. v Allstate Ins. (2018 NY Slip Op 50202(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/active-chiropractic-p-c-v-allstate-ins-2018-ny-slip-op-50202u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2018-02-09 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the provider's action barred by res judicata because a default Supreme Court order declared the insurer owed no coverage for the accident, deeming the answer amended to plead the defense. - [Active Chiropractic, P.C. v Allstate Ins. (2018 NY Slip Op 50201(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/active-chiropractic-p-c-v-allstate-ins-2018-ny-slip-op-50201u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2018-02-09 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the provider's action barred because a default Supreme Court order declared no coverage for the accident and the provider unentitled to payment; the unpleaded res judicata defense was deemed added since it arose after the answer. - [Active Chiropractic, P.C. v 21st Century Ins. Co. (2018 NY Slip Op 50200(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/active-chiropractic-p-c-v-21st-century-ins-co-2018-ny-slip-op50200u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2018-02-09 — DJ does not reach [central]: Held the Supreme Court order had no preclusive effect because it merely granted the default motion without declaring the parties' rights, so it was not a conclusive final determination. - [Greenway Med. Supply Corp. v American Tr. Ins. Co. (2018 NY Slip Op 50039(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/greenway-med-supply-corp-v-american-tr-ins-co-2018-ny-slip-op50039u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2018-01-12 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the action barred by res judicata because the resettled default Supreme Court order, judicially noticed though first offered in reply, correctly covered the accident date and was a conclusive final determination despite the default. - [K.O. Med., P.C. v Mercury Cas. Co. (2017 NY Slip Op 51614(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/k-o-med-p-c-v-mercury-cas-co-2017-ny-slip-op-51614u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2017-11-17 — Barred by DJ [central]: Took judicial notice on appeal of a Supreme Court default declaratory judgment that the provider and assignor were not entitled to benefits for the accident and granted the insurer summary judgment under res judicata. - [Fresh Acupuncture, P.C. v Interboro Ins. Co. (2017 NY Slip Op 27214)](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/fresh-acupuncture-p-c-v-interboro-ins-co-2017-ny-slip-op-27214/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2017-06-23 — DJ does not reach [central]: Vacated dismissal of the provider's claims because the Civil Court that issued the default declaratory order lacked subject matter jurisdiction under CCA 212-a over an insurer's action against a provider. - [Hu-Nam-Nam v Allstate Ins. Co. (2017 NY Slip Op 50685(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/hu-nam-nam-v-allstate-ins-co-2017-ny-slip-op-50685u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2017-05-19 — DJ does not reach [central]: Held the declaratory order did not bar recovery or supply a meritorious defense because it covered claims relating to a June 21 accident while the complaint concerned a June 20 accident, and the discrepancy was unexplained. - [Metro Health Prods., Inc. v Nationwide Ins. (2017 NY Slip Op 50607(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/metro-health-prods-inc-v-nationwide-ins-2017-ny-slip-op-50607u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2017-04-28 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the provider's action barred by res judicata because a default Supreme Court declaratory judgment, entered after the action began, declared the insurer owed nothing on claims from the accident. - [Alleviation Med. Servs., P.C. v Hertz Co. (2017 NY Slip Op 50210(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/alleviation-med-servs-p-c-v-hertz-co-2017-ny-slip-op-50210u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2017-02-08 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held that a judicially noticed default declaratory judgment, declaring that the insurer owed the provider nothing for the accident and permanently staying its suits, was a meritorious defense requiring vacatur of the provider's default summary judgment. - [Active Care Med. Supply Corp. v American Commerce Ins. Co. (2016 NY Slip Op 51813(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/active-care-med-supply-corp-v-american-commerce-ins-co-2016-ny-slipop-51813u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2016-12-15 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the action barred by res judicata because an unvacated default Supreme Court order declared the assignor ineligible and the insurer not obligated under the claim number, and the order could be considered without notice of entry. - [Healthway Med. Care, P.C. v American Tr. Ins. Co. (2016 NY Slip Op 51786(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/healthway-med-care-p-c-v-american-tr-ins-co-2016-ny-slip-op51786u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2016-12-07 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the action barred by res judicata because the Supreme Court order declaring no duty to pay claims from the same accident involved the same insurer, provider and assignor and arose from the same transaction. - [J.K.M. Med. Care, P.C. v Ameriprise Ins. Co. (2016 NY Slip Op 26424)](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/j-k-m-med-care-p-c-v-ameriprise-ins-co-2016-ny-slip-op-26424/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2016-12-07 — Not bound: parties [central]: Held the Supreme Court default declaration did not bar the provider, which was neither named nor served and not in privity because its assignment predated the proceeding, so it had no full and fair opportunity. - [Infinity Chiropractic Health, P.C. v Republic W. Ins. Co. (2016 NY Slip Op 51564(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/infinity-chiropractic-health-p-c-v-republic-w-ins-co-2016-ny-slip-op51564u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2016-10-21 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the provider's claims for the unserved assignor barred because the provider itself was named, served and defaulted in the declaratory action, so the default order conclusively determined its right to recover. - [Metro Health Prods., Inc. v Nationwide Ins. (2016 NY Slip Op 51122(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/metro-health-prods-inc-v-nationwide-ins-2016-ny-slip-op51122u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2016-07-13 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the provider's action barred by res judicata by a default Supreme Court declaratory judgment of no obligation to pay, deeming the answer amended because the defense arose after it and caused no surprise. - [Island Life Chiropractic, P.C. v Unitrin Auto & Home Ins. Co. (2016 NY Slip Op 51076(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/island-life-chiropractic-p-c-v-unitrin-auto-home-ins-co-2016-ny-slipop-51076u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2016-07-08 — Barred by DJ [central]: Upheld dismissal because the Supreme Court order declaring the provider not entitled to benefits for the accident barred the action; the privity objection was unpreserved and the other preclusion arguments lacked merit. - [Atlantic Chiropractic, P.C. v Liberty Mut. Fire Ins. Co. (2016 NY Slip Op 51072(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/atlantic-chiropractic-p-c-v-liberty-mut-fire-ins-co-2016-ny-slip-op51072u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2016-07-07 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the provider's action barred by res judicata because the insurer's default declaratory judgment, shown to have been entered, declared no duty to pay for the accident; failure to serve notice of entry was not fatal. - [J.K.M. Med. Care, P.C. v Liberty Mut. Fire Ins. Co. (2016 NY Slip Op 51071(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/j-k-m-med-care-p-c-v-liberty-mut-fire-ins-co-2016-ny-slip-op51071u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2016-07-07 — Barred by DJ [central]: Deemed the answer amended to plead res judicata absent surprise or prejudice and held the action barred because the insurer's default declaratory judgment declared no obligation to pay the provider for the accident. - [Vital Meridian Acupuncture, P.C. v American Tr. Ins. Co. (2016 NY Slip Op 51007(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/vital-meridian-acupuncture-p-c-v-american-tr-ins-co-2016-ny-slip-op51007u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2016-06-23 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the action barred by res judicata because the unvacated default order in the insurer's declaratory judgment action, naming the provider, declared the assignor ineligible and the insurer not required to pay claims under the policy. - [New Millennium Med. Imaging, P.C. v American Tr. Ins. Co. (2016 NY Slip Op 50259(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/new-millennium-med-imaging-p-c-v-american-tr-ins-co-2016-ny-slipop-50259u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2016-03-01 — DJ does not reach [central]: Denied the insurer summary judgment on res judicata because its own papers gave two different accident dates, leaving a fact issue whether the claim arose from the accident covered by the declaratory judgment. - [IMA Acupuncture, P.C. v Hertz Co. (2016 NY Slip Op 50258(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/ima-acupuncture-p-c-v-hertz-co-2016-ny-slip-op-50258u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2016-03-01 — Barred by DJ [central]: Took judicial notice of a default declaratory judgment, obtained after the insurer's cross motion, that the insurer owed the provider nothing for the accident, and held the action barred by res judicata. - [Metropolitan Diagnostic Med. Care, P.C. v American Commerce Ins. Co. (2016 NY Slip Op 50216(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/metropolitan-diagnostic-med-care-p-c-v-american-commerce-ins-co-2016-ny-slip-op-50216u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2016-02-23 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the provider's action barred by res judicata in light of the default order and judgment declaring the insurer owed the provider nothing under the claim, rejecting arguments about unawareness, pleading and equitable estoppel. - [Natural Therapy Acupuncture, P.C. v Unitrin Auto & Home Ins. Co. (2016 NY Slip Op 50133(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/natural-therapy-acupuncture-p-c-v-unitrin-auto-home-ins-co-2016ny-slip-op-50133u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2016-02-05 — Barred by DJ [central]: Left undisturbed the dismissal based on a default declaratory order of no duty to pay for the collision, holding the provider's argument that the insurer lacked privity with the declaratory-judgment plaintiff unpreserved. - [Renelique v State-Wide Ins. Co. (2016 NY Slip Op 50096(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/renelique-v-state-wide-ins-co-2016-ny-slip-op-50096u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2016-01-20 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the action barred by res judicata, taking judicial notice of the default declaratory order, and found no waiver of the unpleaded defense because the order postdated the answer and caused no surprise or prejudice. - [Renelique v State-Wide Ins. Co. (2016 NY Slip Op 50095(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/renelique-v-state-wide-ins-co-2016-ny-slip-op-50095u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2016-01-20 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the action barred by res judicata because the unvacated default order in the insurer's declaratory judgment action declared no coverage for the accident and was a conclusive final determination. - [Daily Med. Equip. Distrib. Ctr., Inc. v American Tr. Ins. Co. (2015 NY Slip Op 51897(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/daily-med-equip-distrib-ctr-inc-v-american-tr-ins-co-2015-ny-slip-op51897u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2015-12-18 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the action barred by res judicata because the declaratory judgment, entered after the suit began, declared the named provider not entitled to benefits for the accident and was conclusive despite entry on default. - [Promed Orthocare Supply, Inc. v AIG Advantage Ins. Co. (2015 NY Slip Op 51886(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/promed-orthocare-supply-inc-v-aig-advantage-ins-co-2015-ny-slip-op51886u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2015-12-15 — DJ does not reach [central]: Held the default order had no preclusive effect because it merely granted entry of a declaratory judgment without declaring the parties' rights, so it was not a conclusive final determination. - [Best Touch PT, P.C. v American Tr. Ins. Co. (2015 NY Slip Op 51789(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/best-touch-pt-p-c-v-american-tr-ins-co-2015-ny-slip-op51789u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2015-12-02 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the action barred by res judicata because the default order in the insurer's prior declaratory judgment action declared it owed nothing to the named providers for the assignor's accident. - [Stracar Med. Servs. v Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co. (2015 NY Slip Op 51761(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/stracar-med-servs-v-nationwide-mut-ins-co-2015-ny-slip-op51761u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2015-12-01 — Not bound: parties [central]: Held the provider not bound by a Virginia order voiding the policy ab initio because it was not a party and the insurer did not show privity with the assignor when that action was commenced. - [Vital Meridian Acupuncture, P.C. v American Tr. Ins. Co. (2015 NY Slip Op 51078(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/vital-meridian-acupuncture-p-c-v-american-tr-ins-co-2015-ny-slip-op-51078u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2015-07-14 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the action barred by res judicata because the unvacated default declaratory judgment declared the provider not entitled to benefits for the accident, and a default judgment is a conclusive final determination. - [Great Health Care Chiropractic, P.C. v Progressive Ins. Co. (2015 NY Slip Op 51077(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/great-health-care-chiropractic-p-c-v-progressive-ins-co-2015-ny-slip-op-51077u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2015-07-14 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the action barred by res judicata because the unvacated default declaratory judgment declared the provider not entitled to benefits arising from the accidents in the alleged fraud scheme. - [GBI Acupuncture, P.C. v Nationwide Ins. (2015 NY Slip Op 51048(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/gbi-acupuncture-p-c-v-nationwide-ins-2015-ny-slip-op-51048u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2015-07-07 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the action barred by res judicata because the unvacated default order declared the insurer not obligated to pay the provider and assignor for the accident, a conclusive final determination despite the default. - [Delta Diagnostic Radiology, P.C. v Hertz Co. (2015 NY Slip Op 51050(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/delta-diagnostic-radiology-p-c-v-hertz-co-2015-ny-slip-op-51050u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2015-07-07 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the provider's action barred by res judicata because a Supreme Court default declaratory judgment, never vacated, declared the insurer not obligated to cover the provider's claims from the accident. - [Omphil Care, Inc. v Hertz Co. (2015 NY Slip Op 51052(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/omphil-care-inc-v-hertz-co-2015-ny-slip-op-51052u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2015-07-07 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the provider's action barred by res judicata because a default declaratory judgment declared the insurer had no obligation to pay its claims for the accident, even though notice of entry had not yet been served. - [Metro Health Prods., Inc. v Nationwide Ins. (2015 NY Slip Op 25203)](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/metro-health-prods-inc-v-nationwide-ins-2015-ny-slip-op-25203/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2015-06-16 — DJ does not reach [central]: Held a Supreme Court order granting the insurer's unopposed default motion and directing settlement of a judgment made no declaration of rights, so it was not a final determination and had no preclusive effect. - [Ultimate Health Prods., Inc. v American Tr. Ins. Co. (2015 NY Slip Op 50906(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/ultimate-health-prods-inc-v-american-tr-ins-co-2015-ny-slip-op50906u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2015-06-11 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the action barred by res judicata because the unvacated default order granted the insurer's declaratory judgment motion against the provider and assignor regarding coverage for the accident. - [Vital Meridian Acupuncture, P.C. v Republic W. Ins. Co. (2015 NY Slip Op 50222(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/vital-meridian-acupuncture-p-c-v-republic-w-ins-co-2015-ny-slip-op50222u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2015-02-24 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the provider's pending action barred by res judicata because a default Supreme Court order declared the insurer owed it no benefits for the accident, and a default order is a conclusive final determination. - [Vital Meridian Acupuncture, P.C. v Republic W. Ins. Co. (2015 NY Slip Op 50221(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/vital-meridian-acupuncture-p-c-v-republic-w-ins-co-2015-ny-slip-op50221u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2015-02-24 — Barred by DJ [central]: Affirmed dismissal of the provider's action as barred by res judicata and collateral estoppel, for the reasons stated in the companion appeal decided the same day. - [Lms Acupuncture, P.C. v American Tr. Ins. Co. (2015 NY Slip Op 50198(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/lms-acupuncture-p-c-v-american-tr-ins-co-2015-ny-slip-op50198u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2015-02-23 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the provider's action barred by res judicata because a default Supreme Court declaration, later embodied in a long-form order, found the assignor ineligible and the insurer not obligated to pay the provider's claims from the accident. - [Great Health Care Chiropractic, P.C. v American Tr. Ins. Co. (2014 NY Slip Op 51324(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/great-health-care-chiropractic-p-c-v-american-tr-ins-co-2014-ny-slipop-51324u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2014-08-20 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the provider's pending action barred by res judicata because a judgment for it would impair rights established by the insurer's Supreme Court declaratory judgment, and failure to serve notice of entry was not fatal. - [Ultimate Health Prods., Inc. v American Tr. Ins. Co. (2014 NY Slip Op 51321(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/ultimate-health-prods-inc-v-american-tr-ins-co-2014-ny-slip-op51321u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2014-08-20 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the pending action barred by res judicata because a default declaratory judgment found the assignor ineligible and the insurer not obligated to pay the provider's claims in any current or future proceeding from the accident. - [Flatlands Med., P.C. v Kemper Ins. Co. (2014 NY Slip Op 50419(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/flatlands-med-p-c-v-kemper-ins-co-2014-ny-slip-op50419u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2014-03-11 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held dismissal proper because a default Supreme Court declaratory judgment declared the named defendants, including the provider, not entitled to no-fault benefits from the same accident. - [Flushing Traditional Acupuncture, P.C. v Kemper Ins. Co. (2014 NY Slip Op 50052(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/flushing-traditional-acupuncture-p-c-v-kemper-ins-co-2014-ny-slip-op50052u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2014-01-10 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the provider's action barred by res judicata because a default declaratory judgment declared the named providers, including it, not entitled to benefits from the accident, so recovery would impair rights the judgment established. - [Compas Med., P.C. v Geico Ins. Co. (2013 NY Slip Op 52016(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/compas-med-p-c-v-geico-ins-co-2013-ny-slip-op-52016u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2013-11-29 — Stayed pending DJ [central]: Held it was a proper CPLR 2201 exercise of discretion to stay the provider's action pending the insurer's Supreme Court declaratory judgment action, in which the provider and its assignor were named defendants, to avoid inconsistent adjudications. - [Eagle Surgical Supply, Inc. v AIG Ins. Co. (2013 NY Slip Op 51449(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/eagle-surgical-supply-inc-v-aig-ins-co-2013-ny-slip-op51449u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2013-08-21 — DJ does not reach [central]: Held the default declaratory judgment did not warrant vacating the provider's judgment because the accident date at issue was not among the incident dates listed in the declaratory judgment. - [Eagle Surgical Supply, Inc. v AIG Indem. Ins. Co. (2013 NY Slip Op 51441(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/eagle-surgical-supply-inc-v-aig-indem-ins-co-2013-ny-slip-op51441u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2013-08-21 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the provider's action barred by res judicata because a default declaratory judgment declared no coverage for the claim, and an earlier conditional preclusion order against the insurer did not prevent giving the judgment that effect. - [Smooth Dental, P.L.L.C. v Preferred Mut. Ins. Co. (2012 NY Slip Op 22301)](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/smooth-dental-p-l-l-c-v-preferred-mut-ins-co-2012-ny-slip-op-22301/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2012-10-16 — Not bound: parties [central]: Held the declaration of no coverage against the assignor did not bar the provider's action because the provider was neither named nor served and the assignment predated the declaratory action. - [EBM Med. Health Care, P.C. v Republic W. Ins. (2012 NY Slip Op 22300)](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/ebm-med-health-care-p-c-v-republic-w-ins-2012-ny-slip-op-22300/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2012-10-16 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the unvacated default declaratory judgment that the provider was improperly licensed and owed nothing in any current or future proceeding barred the pending action by res judicata, as it was a current proceeding. - [Ava Acupuncture, P.C. v NY Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co. (2012 NY Slip Op 50233(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/ava-acupuncture-p-c-v-ny-cent-mut-fire-ins-co-2012-ny-slip-op50233u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2012-02-09 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the unvacated default order declaring no present or future obligation to pay benefits to the provider and its assignors was a conclusive final determination barring the pending action by res judicata. - [City Dental Servs., P.C. v New York Cent. Mut. (2011 NY Slip Op 52285(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/city-dental-servs-p-c-v-new-york-cent-mut-2011-ny-slip-op-52285u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2011-12-16 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the provider precluded on the sixth cause of action by a default declaratory judgment of no duty to pay for the allegedly staged incident, since provider and assignor were named defendants and no lack of notice or vacatur attempt was shown. - [R.D.K. Med., P.C. v NY Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co. (2011 NY Slip Op 51988(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/r-d-k-med-p-c-v-ny-cent-mut-fire-ins-co-2011-ny-slip-op51988u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2011-10-25 — DJ does not reach [central]: Held the insurer failed to show the action was barred because the default declaratory judgment listed staged incidents that did not include the accident date recited in the insurer's own denials. - [Magic Recovery Med. & Surgical Supply Inc. v State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. (2010 NY Slip Op 20130)](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/magic-recovery-med-surgical-supply-inc-v-state-farm-mut-auto-ins-co-2010-ny-slip-op-20130/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2010-04-09 — Not bound: parties [central]: Held default declaratory judgments on staged incidents did not collaterally estop the provider, which was neither named nor served and whose assignments predated the actions, and default judgments involved no actual litigation of the issues. - [SZ Med., P.C. v Erie Ins. Co. (2009 NY Slip Op 51221(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/sz-med-p-c-v-erie-ins-co-2009-ny-slip-op-51221u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2009-06-12 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the default declaratory judgment of no coverage for the staged accident, obtained against the providers by the insurer's wholly owned subsidiary in privity with it, barred the providers' action under res judicata. - [Mid Atl. Med., P.C. v Victoria Select Ins. Co. (2008 NY Slip Op 51758(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/mid-atl-med-p-c-v-victoria-select-ins-co-2008-ny-slip-op-51758u/) — Appellate Term, Second Department, 2008-08-19 — Not bound: parties [also decides]: Held the Virginia order rescinding the policy had no collateral estoppel effect because the provider was not a party and its assignments predated that proceeding, though the order raised a triable coverage issue defeating summary judgment. ### Trial courts in the First Department - [Integrated Pain Mgt., PLLC v Empire Fire & Mar. Ins. Co. (2023 NY Slip Op 50219(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/integrated-pain-mgt-pllc-v-empire-fire-mar-ins-co-2023-ny-slip-op50219u/) — Civil Court of the City of New York, Bronx County, 2023-03-22 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the provider collaterally estopped because a default declaratory judgment in an action naming the provider and assignor decided there was no coverage for the same accident, and the provider, not opposing, raised no issue of fact. - [American Tr. Ins. Co. v Romero-Richiez (2020 NY Slip Op 51181(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/american-tr-ins-co-v-romero-richiez-2020-ny-slip-op-51181u/) — Supreme Court, New York County, 2020-10-09 — Not bound: parties [also decides]: Held that the default declaration against the assignor did not bind the provider assignee, because an assignment made before the action is not barred by a default against the assignor. - [American Tr. Ins. Co. v Martinez (2020 NY Slip Op 50930(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/american-tr-ins-co-v-martinez-2020-ny-slip-op-50930u/) — Supreme Court, New York County, 2020-08-21 — Not bound: parties [also decides]: Held the default declaration against the assignor did not preclude the appearing provider, whose assignment predated the action and against whom the prior order declared no rights. - [American Tr. Ins. Co. v Wildex (2020 NY Slip Op 50929(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/american-tr-ins-co-v-wildex-2020-ny-slip-op-50929u/) — Supreme Court, New York County, 2020-08-21 — Not bound: parties [also decides]: Held the default declaration against the assignor did not preclude the appearing provider, whose assignment predated the action and against whom the prior order declared no rights. - [Ameriprise Ins. Co. v Hampton (2018 NY Slip Op 51207(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/ameriprise-ins-co-v-hampton-2018-ny-slip-op-51207u/) — Supreme Court, New York County, 2018-08-14 — Stayed pending DJ [central]: Granted the insurer a preliminary injunction against all pending and future no-fault suits by the defendants pending determination of its declaratory judgment action, because it showed likely success, irreparable harm from repetitive litigation and favorable equities. ### Trial courts in the Second Department - [Parisien v ZipCar c/o Corp. Serv. Co. (2026 NY Slip Op 26130)](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/parisien-v-zipcar-c-o-corp-serv-co-2026-ny-slip-op-26130/) — Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County, 2026-08-07 — Barred by DJ [central]: Granted the insurer a directed verdict because an unvacated default declaratory judgment, against the provider who was served, expressly declared no coverage for the same collision and claim, so res judicata and collateral estoppel barred the action. - [Tristate Multi-Specialty Med. Servs., P.C. v Progressive Cas. Ins. Co. (2026 NY Slip Op 50340(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/tristate-multi-specialty-med-servs-p-c-v-progressive-cas-ins-co-2026-ny-slip-op-50340u/) — Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County, 2026-03-17 — Barred by DJ [central]: Granted the insurer a directed verdict dismissing the provider's action because a Supreme Court staged-accident declaratory judgment barred payment to the provider for the incident, rejecting the bid for judgment in the non-party assignor's favor. - [Reactive Physical Therapy, P.C. v Progressive Cas. Ins. Co. (2026 NY Slip Op 50343(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/reactive-physical-therapy-p-c-v-progressive-cas-ins-co-2026-ny-slip-op-50343u/) — Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County, 2026-03-17 — Barred by DJ [central]: Granted the insurer a directed verdict dismissing the provider's action because a Supreme Court staged-accident declaratory judgment barred payment to the provider for the incident, rejecting the bid for judgment in the non-party assignor's favor. - [Prompt Med. Supply Inc v Metropolitan Gen. Ins Co. (2024 NY Slip Op 50654(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/prompt-med-supply-inc-v-metropolitan-gen-ins-co-2024-ny-slip-op-50654u/) — Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County, 2024-05-31 — DJ does not reach [central]: Refused to dismiss on res judicata or collateral estoppel because the New Jersey declaratory judgment was entered on the provider's default without any appearance, and CPLR 5401 denies such sister-state default judgments full faith and credit recognition. - [Primavera Physical Therapy, P.C. v State Farm Ins. Co. (2024 NY Slip Op 50276(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/primavera-physical-therapy-p-c-v-state-farm-ins-co-2024-ny-slip-op-50276u/) — Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County, 2024-03-05 — Barred by DJ [central]: Dismissed the provider's action under res judicata and collateral estoppel because a default Supreme Court declaratory judgment covering the same parties and accident declared no right to payment, despite the absence of a claim number. - [Renelique v Foremost Signature Ins. Co. (2023 NY Slip Op 51226(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/renelique-v-foremost-signature-ins-co-2023-ny-slip-op-51226u/) — Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County, 2023-11-20 — DJ does not reach [also decides]: Held, alternatively to untimeliness, that a default declaratory order marked non-final, not shown to cover this accident or claim, and not shown to follow the provider's willful nonparticipation, did not bar the action by res judicata or collateral estoppel, leaving factual issues for trial. - [Dos Manos Chiropractic, P.C. v State Farm Ins. Co. (2022 NY Slip Op 50995(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/dos-manos-chiropractic-p-c-v-state-farm-ins-co-2022-ny-slip-op50995u/) — Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County, 2022-10-12 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the action barred by res judicata because the default declaratory judgment against the provider and assignor covered the same accident, and an unvacated default judgment is a conclusive final determination. - [Parisien v Avis Budget Car Rental, LLC (2022 NY Slip Op 50883(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/parisien-v-avis-budget-car-rental-llc-2022-ny-slip-op-50883u/) — Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County, 2022-09-19 — Not bound: parties [central]: Held res judicata inapplicable because the defendant failed to establish it was the same party as the rental company that brought the prior Supreme Court action. - [Fine Needle Acupuncture P.C. v State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. (2022 NY Slip Op 50873(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/fine-needle-acupuncture-p-c-v-state-farm-mut-auto-ins-co-2022-ny-slip-op50873u/) — Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County, 2022-09-16 — Barred by DJ [central]: Rejected res judicata because the Supreme Court order was not a default judgment, but held the provider collaterally estopped by that court's finding that it failed to appear for EUOs, and dismissed the action. - [Tandingan PT PC v State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. (2021 NY Slip Op 50869(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/tandingan-pt-pc-v-state-farm-fire-cas-co-2021-ny-slip-op-50869u/) — Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County, 2021-09-16 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held that the Supreme Court inquest order declaring no obligation to pay the claims listed in its exhibit, for EUO no-shows, barred by res judicata the three claims this action shared with that list. - [Columbus Imaging Ctr. v Country Wide Ins. Co. (2021 NY Slip Op 50851(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/columbus-imaging-ctr-v-country-wide-ins-co-2021-ny-slip-op50851u/) — Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County, 2021-09-08 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the provider's action barred by res judicata because an unvacated default DJ against the provider and assignor declared the insurer owed no current or future no-fault benefits for the assignor's accident. - [Sutter Pharmacy v State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. (2021 NY Slip Op 50610(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/sutter-pharmacy-v-state-farm-mut-auto-ins-co-2021-ny-slip-op50610u/) — Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County, 2021-06-24 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the unvacated default DJ declaring no coverage for this plaintiff, date of loss and claim number preclusive, finding good cause for the late summary judgment motion, and dismissed the complaint with prejudice. - [Total Chiropratic P.C. v Mercury Cas. Ins. Co. (2021 NY Slip Op 50142(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/total-chiropratic-p-c-v-mercury-cas-ins-co-2021-ny-slip-op-50142u/) — Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County, 2021-02-08 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the unvacated default DJ, naming both provider and assignor and declaring no coverage for the accident, a conclusive final determination that barred the provider's action, so neither side's prima facie case needed review. - [Bronx Chiropractic Rehabilitation, P.C. v Progressive Ins. Co. (2020 NY Slip Op 20275)](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/bronx-chiropractic-rehabilitation-p-c-v-progressive-ins-co-2020-ny-slip-op-20275/) — Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County, 2020-10-20 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the provider's action barred by res judicata and collateral estoppel by a declaratory judgment voiding the policy, because the insurer proved the DJ plaintiff was the true insurer and the misnamed defendant was amended accordingly. - [Psychology After Acc., P.C. v State Farm Fire & Cas. Ins. Co. (2019 NY Slip Op 51932(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/psychology-after-acc-p-c-v-state-farm-fire-cas-ins-co-2019-ny-slipop-51932u/) — Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County, 2019-12-02 — Barred by DJ [central]: On reargument, held the provider's action barred by res judicata because a default Supreme Court declaratory judgment, read with the complaint it referenced, finally determined the provider's failure to appear for EUOs. - [Kerisli Chiropractic, P.C. v American Tr. Ins. Co. (2018 NY Slip Op 28325)](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/kerisli-chiropractic-p-c-v-american-tr-ins-co-2018-ny-slip-op-28325/) — Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County, 2018-10-18 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the action barred by res judicata because the unvacated default Supreme Court order expressly recited the declaration that the provider was not entitled to benefits for the accident, making it a conclusive final determination. - [Stracar Med. Servs. v Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co. (2013 NY Slip Op 50633(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/stracar-med-servs-v-nationwide-mut-ins-co-2013-ny-slip-op50633u/) — Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County, 2013-04-22 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the provider's claims barred by a sister-state consent order declaring the policy void ab initio, which was entitled to full faith and credit as interstate res judicata despite the assignment predating that action. - [Sutter Med. Care P.C. v Progressive Cas. Ins. Co. (2013 NY Slip Op 50117(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/sutter-med-care-p-c-v-progressive-cas-ins-co-2013-ny-slip-op50117u/) — District Court of Nassau County, First District, 2013-01-24 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the default declaratory judgment declaring no obligation to pay the provider's claims for this assignor under the same claim number barred the action by res judicata, even though the defense was unpleaded and EUO requests for these bills were not proved. - [Altercare Acupuncture, P.C. v Utica Mut. Ins. Co. (2011 NY Slip Op 51639(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/altercare-acupuncture-p-c-v-utica-mut-ins-co-2011-ny-slip-op51639u/) — Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County, 2011-08-30 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the unvacated default declaratory judgment finding a staged accident, entered against the duly served provider, barred the action by res judicata. - [Bedford Med. Care, P.C. v Encompass Ins. Co. (2011 NY Slip Op 21023)](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/bedford-med-care-p-c-v-encompass-ins-co-2011-ny-slip-op-21023/) — Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County, 2011-01-03 — Stayed pending DJ [central]: Held a default declaratory judgment had no collateral estoppel effect because the issue was not actually litigated, but stayed the action indefinitely so the provider could move to vacate its default in the declaratory action. - [Rizz Mgt. Inc. v State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. (2008 NY Slip Op 51191(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/rizz-mgt-inc-v-state-farm-mut-auto-ins-co-2008-ny-slip-op51191u/) — District Court of Nassau County, First District, 2008-06-17 — Not bound: parties [also decides]: Refused preclusive effect to prior default orders permanently staying uninsured motorist arbitrations because the insurer did not show the provider was in privity with its assignor and default orders were not actually litigated. - [Alpha Health Care Plus Med. v Progressive Ins. Co. (2007 NY Slip Op 52209(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/alpha-health-care-plus-med-v-progressive-ins-co-2007-ny-slip-op52209u/) — Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County, 2007-11-23 — Barred by DJ [central]: Held the entry of judgment a nullity because it was filed after the default declaratory judgment staying all proceedings, and treated that judgment as evidence of a meritorious defense supporting vacatur of the provider's default summary judgment. - [St. Paul Travelers Ins. Co. v Nandi (2007 NY Slip Op 51154(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/st-paul-travelers-ins-co-v-nandi-2007-ny-slip-op-51154u/) — Supreme Court, Queens County, 2007-05-25 — Stayed pending DJ [central]: Treated the requested stay as a preliminary injunction and enjoined the providers' pending no-fault collection actions and any new suits pending the declaratory judgment action, given likely success, the many suits and the risk of inconsistent outcomes. - [A.B. Med. Servs. PLLC v State Farm Mutual Auto Ins. Co. (2006 NY Slip Op 50598(U))](https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/a-b-med-servs-pllc-v-state-farm-mutual-auto-ins-co-2006-ny-slip-op-50598u/) — Civil Court, Kings County, 2006-03-03 — Not bound: parties [central]: Held the default declaratory judgment against the assignors did not collaterally estop the providers because their assignments predated the declaratory action, and a default judgment involved no actual litigation.