December 8, 2017

Ultimate Care Chiropractic, P.C. v Merchants Mut. Ins. Co. (2017 NY Slip Op 51717(U))

Headnote

The court considered the denial of plaintiff's motion for summary judgment and the granting of defendant's cross motion for summary judgment in this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits. The main issue decided was whether defendant's cross motion for summary judgment should have been denied. The holding of the court was that all of plaintiff's arguments as to why defendant's cross motion for summary judgment should have been denied are not properly before this court, since they are being raised for the first time on appeal, and therefore the order is affirmed.

Reported in New York Official Reports at Ultimate Care Chiropractic, P.C. v Merchants Mut. Ins. Co. (2017 NY Slip Op 51717(U))

Ultimate Care Chiropractic, P.C. v Merchants Mut. Ins. Co. (2017 NY Slip Op 51717(U)) [*1]
Ultimate Care Chiropractic, P.C. v Merchants Mut. Ins. Co.
2017 NY Slip Op 51717(U) [58 Misc 3d 127(A)]
Decided on December 8, 2017
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This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 December 8, 2017
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, SECOND DEPARTMENT, 2d, 11th and 13th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
PRESENT: : MICHAEL L. PESCE, P.J., THOMAS P. ALIOTTA, MARTIN M. SOLOMON, JJ
2014-2109 Q C

Ultimate Care Chiropractic, P.C., as Assignee of Pete, Rodney, Appellant,

against

Merchants Mutual Ins. Co., Respondent.

The Rybak Firm, PLLC (Damin J. Toell, Esq.), for appellant. Lawrence N. Rogak, LLC (Lawrence N. Rogak, Esq.), for respondent.

Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County (Ulysses Bernard Leverett, J.), entered July 25, 2014. The order denied plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and granted defendant’s cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

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 of the Civil Court which denied plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and granted defendant’s cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

All of plaintiff’s arguments as to why defendant’s cross motion for summary judgment should have been denied are not properly before this court, since they are being raised for the first time on appeal, and we decline to consider them (see Joe v Upper Room Ministries, Inc., 88 AD3d 963 [2011]; Gulf Ins. Co. v Kanen, 13 AD3d 579 [2004]). Accordingly, the order is affirmed.

PESCE, P.J., ALIOTTA and SOLOMON, JJ., concur.


ENTER:
Paul Kenny
Chief Clerk
Decision Date: December 08, 2017