December 17, 2014

Arco Med. NY, P.C. v Praetorian Ins. Co. (2014 NY Slip Op 51800(U))

Headnote

The court considered an appeal from an order of the Civil Court that denied the defendant's motion seeking summary judgment dismissing the complaint seeking to recover first-party no-fault benefits for medical services rendered by Arco Medical NY, P.C. The main issue decided was whether there was a triable issue of fact regarding the medical necessity of the services at issue. The holding of the court was that upon review of the record, it was found that there was indeed a triable issue of fact regarding the medical necessity of the services, and therefore the order denying the defendant's motion was affirmed.

Reported in New York Official Reports at Arco Med. NY, P.C. v Praetorian Ins. Co. (2014 NY Slip Op 51800(U))

Arco Med. NY, P.C. v Praetorian Ins. Co. (2014 NY Slip Op 51800(U)) [*1]

Arco Med. NY, P.C. v Praetorian Ins. Co.

2014 NY Slip Op 51800(U) [46 Misc 3d 128(A)]

Decided on December 17, 2014

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This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 17, 2014

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

PRESENT: : PESCE, P.J., ALIOTTA and SOLOMON, JJ.
2012-893 K C

Arco Medical NY, P.C., as Assignee of VIVIAN BONILLA, Respondent, -and
against
Megacure Acupuncture, P.C. as Assignee of VIVIAN BONILLA, Plaintiff, Praetorian Insurance Company, Appellant.

Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Dawn Jimenez Salta, J.), entered March 29, 2012. The order, insofar as appealed from and as limited by the brief, denied the branch of defendant’s motion seeking summary judgment dismissing so much of the complaint as sought to recover upon a claim for services rendered by plaintiff Arco Medical NY, P.C. on April 11, 2008.

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

In this action by providers to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, defendant appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Civil Court as denied the branch of defendant’s motion seeking summary judgment dismissing so much of the complaint as sought to recover upon a claim for services rendered by plaintiff Arco Medical NY, P.C. on April 11, 2008.

Upon a review of the record, we find that there is a triable issue of fact regarding the medical necessity of the services at issue (see Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557 [1980]).

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

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

Decision Date: December 17, 2014