June 23, 2016

Stephen v NY Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co. (2016 NY Slip Op 51010(U))

Headnote

The relevant facts considered in this case were that a provider was seeking to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits from the defendant insurance company. The defendant moved for summary judgment to dismiss 50 of the complaint's causes of action, which the Civil Court granted in part and denied in part. The main issue decided by the court was whether the defendant had established its entitlement to summary judgment in dismissing the remaining 50 causes of action, based on the defendant's failure to conclusively demonstrate that its time to pay or deny the claims at issue had been tolled. The holding of the court was that the order of the Civil Court, insofar as appealed from, was affirmed, with the defendant being ordered to pay $25 in costs. The decision was made by Pesce, P.J., Aliotta and Solomon, JJ., and the date of the decision was June 23, 2016.

Reported in New York Official Reports at Stephen v NY Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co. (2016 NY Slip Op 51010(U))

Stephen v NY Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co. (2016 NY Slip Op 51010(U)) [*1]

Stephen v NY Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co.

2016 NY Slip Op 51010(U) [52 Misc 3d 133(A)]

Decided on June 23, 2016

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This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 23, 2016

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

PRESENT: : PESCE, P.J., ALIOTTA and SOLOMON, JJ.
2013-2027 Q C

Fontanella Daniel Stephen, D.C., as Assignee of Joshua German, John Sosa, Hector Delacruz and Diane Rodriguez, Respondent,
against
NY Central Mut. Fire Ins. Co., Appellant.

Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County (Jodi Orlow, J.), entered May 23, 2013. The order, insofar as appealed from, denied the branches of defendant’s motion seeking summary judgment dismissing 50 of the complaint’s causes of action.

ORDERED that the order, insofar as appealed from, is affirmed, with $25 costs.

In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, defendant moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, which motion plaintiff opposed. By order entered May 23, 2013, the Civil Court granted the branches of defendant’s motion seeking the dismissal of 50 of the complaint’s causes of action and denied the branches seeking dismissal of the remaining 50 causes of action. Defendant appeals from so much of the order as denied the branches of its motion.

Upon a review of the record, we find that defendant’s moving papers do not establish defendant’s prima facie entitlement to summary judgment dismissing the remaining 50 causes of action, as defendant failed to conclusively demonstrate that its time to pay or deny the claims at issue had been tolled.

Accordingly, the order, insofar as appealed from, is affirmed.

Pesce, P.J., Aliotta and Solomon, JJ., concur.

Decision Date: June 23, 2016