January 6, 2023

New Millennium Med. Imaging, P.C. v Farmers Ins. Co. (2023 NY Slip Op 50091(U))

Headnote

The court considered the appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County, which denied the defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. The main issue decided was whether the action by the provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits was barred by the statute of limitations. The holding of the court was that the order denying the defendant's motion for summary judgment was affirmed, with $25 costs. The court affirmed the order based on the reasons stated in New Millennium Med. Imaging, P.C. v GEICO, and the justices concurred with the decision.

Reported in New York Official Reports at New Millennium Med. Imaging, P.C. v Farmers Ins. Co. (2023 NY Slip Op 50091(U))

New Millennium Med. Imaging, P.C. v Farmers Ins. Co. (2023 NY Slip Op 50091(U)) [*1]

New Millennium Med. Imaging, P.C. v Farmers Ins. Co.

2023 NY Slip Op 50091(U) [77 Misc 3d 141(A)]

Decided on January 6, 2023

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This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 January 6, 2023

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

PRESENT: : MICHELLE WESTON, J.P., WAVNY TOUSSAINT, CHEREÉ A. BUGGS, JJ
2021-644 K C

New Millennium Medical Imaging, P.C., as Assignee of Geremy Votor, Respondent,
against
Farmers Insurance Company, Appellant.

Law Offices of Rothenberg & Burns (Bianca Mayard Francois of counsel), for appellant. Law Office of Damin J. Toell, P.C., for respondent (no brief filed).

Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Rupert V. Barry, J.), dated June 28, 2021. The order, insofar as appealed from, denied defendant’s motion for, in effect, summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

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 appeals, as limited by its notice of appeal, from so much of an order of the Civil Court as denied defendant’s motion for, in effect, summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the action is barred by the statute of limitations.

For the reasons stated in New Millennium Med. Imaging, P.C. v GEICO (76 Misc 3d 31 [App Term, 2d Dept, 2d, 11th & 13th Jud Dists 2022]), the order, insofar as appealed from, is affirmed.

TOUSSAINT and BUGGS, JJ., concur.

WESTON, J.P., taking no part.

ENTER:
Paul Kenny
Chief Clerk
Decision Date: January 6, 2023