December 20, 2012

Lenox Hill Hosp. v Tower Ins. Co. of N.Y. (2012 NY Slip Op 52391(U))

Headnote

The relevant facts considered by the court were that Lenox Hill Hospital was seeking to recover no-fault benefits on behalf of Charles Barclay. The main issue decided was whether Lenox Hill Hospital was entitled to summary judgment in their favor, and the court held that they were not entitled to summary judgment as they had not demonstrated their prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law. The court affirmed the denial of Lenox Hill Hospital's motion for summary judgment, stating that they had not shown sufficient evidence to support their claim.

Reported in New York Official Reports at Lenox Hill Hosp. v Tower Ins. Co. of N.Y. (2012 NY Slip Op 52391(U))

Lenox Hill Hosp. v Tower Ins. Co. of N.Y. (2012 NY Slip Op 52391(U)) [*1]

Lenox Hill Hosp. v Tower Ins. Co. of N.Y.

2012 NY Slip Op 52391(U) [38 Misc 3d 129]

Decided on December 20, 2012

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This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 20, 2012

SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, SECOND DEPARTMENT, 9th and 10th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS

PRESENT: : MOLIA, J.P., NICOLAI and IANNACCI, JJ
2011-2152 S C.

Lenox Hill Hospital as Assignee of CHARLES BARCLAY, Appellant, —
against
Tower Insurance Company of New York, Respondent.

Appeal from an order of the District Court of Suffolk County, Second District (Stephen L. Ukeiley, J.), dated June 13, 2011. The order denied plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs.

In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, the District Court properly denied plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment on the ground that plaintiff had not demonstrated its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law (see New York Hosp. Med. Ctr. of Queens v Statewide Ins. Co., 33 Misc 3d 130[A], 2011 NY Slip Op 51863[U] [App Term, 9th & 10th Jud Dists 2011]).

Accordingly, the order is affirmed.

Molia, J.P., Nicolai and Iannacci, JJ., concur.
Decision Date: December 20, 2012