June 10, 2022

Veraso Med. Supply Corp. v State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. (2022 NY Slip Op 50584(U))

Headnote

The relevant facts the court considered in Veraso Medical Supply Corp. v State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co. were that the plaintiff, Veraso Medical Supply Corp., was seeking to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits from the defendant, State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co. The main issue decided was whether the affidavit submitted by the plaintiff in opposition to the defendant's motion for summary judgment was sufficient to demonstrate the existence of an issue of fact. The holding of the court was that the affidavit submitted by the plaintiff was insufficient, and therefore the order granting the defendant’s motion for summary judgment and denying the plaintiff's cross motion for summary judgment was affirmed.

Reported in New York Official Reports at Veraso Med. Supply Corp. v State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. (2022 NY Slip Op 50584(U))

Veraso Med. Supply Corp. v State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. (2022 NY Slip Op 50584(U)) [*1]

Veraso Med. Supply Corp. v State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.

2022 NY Slip Op 50584(U) [75 Misc 3d 139(A)]

Decided on June 10, 2022

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This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 June 10, 2022

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

PRESENT: : THOMAS P. ALIOTTA, P.J., WAVNY TOUSSAINT, DONNA-MARIE E. GOLIA, JJ
2020-467 K C

Veraso Medical Supply Corp., as Assignee of Gomez, Nelson, Appellant,
against
State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co., Respondent.

The Rybak Firm, PLLC (Damin J. Toell of counsel), for appellant. Rivkin Radler, LLP (Stuart M. Bodoff of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Carolyn Walker-Diallo, J.), entered March 15, 2019. The order granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and denied plaintiff’s cross motion for summary judgment.

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

In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, plaintiff appeals from an order which granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and denied plaintiff’s cross motion for summary judgment.

Contrary to plaintiff’s sole contention on appeal with respect to defendant’s motion, the affidavit submitted by plaintiff in opposition to defendant’s motion was insufficient to demonstrate the existence of an issue of fact (see CPM Med Supply, Inc. v State Farm Fire & Cas. Ins. Co., 63 Misc 3d 140[A], 2019 NY Slip Op 50576[U] [App Term, 2d Dept, 2d, 11th & 13th Jud Dists 2019]; D & R Med. Supply v American Tr. Ins. Co., 32 Misc 3d 144[A], 2011 NY Slip Op 51727[U] [App Term, 2d Dept, 2d, 11th & 13th Jud Dists 2011]).

Accordingly, the order is affirmed.

ALIOTTA, P.J., TOUSSAINT and GOLIA, JJ., concur.

ENTER:
Paul Kenny
Chief Clerk
Decision Date: June 10, 2022