November 16, 2018

Right Aid Med. Supply Corp. v Hereford Ins. Co. (2018 NY Slip Op 51641(U))

Headnote

The court considered the fact that Right Aid Medical Supply Corp., as Assignee of Mery M. Quezada, was seeking to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits from Hereford Insurance Co. The main issue was whether the action was premature because plaintiff had failed to provide requested verification. Defendant argued that the action was premature because the requested verification had not been received, but plaintiff's affidavit was deemed sufficient to give rise to a presumption that the verification had been mailed to and received by the defendant. As a triable issue of fact existed as to whether the action was premature, the Civil Court denied defendant's motion for summary judgment, and the order was affirmed. Therefore, the holding of the case was that the denial of the defendant's motion for summary judgment was proper due to the existence of a triable issue of fact.

Reported in New York Official Reports at Right Aid Med. Supply Corp. v Hereford Ins. Co. (2018 NY Slip Op 51641(U))

Right Aid Med. Supply Corp. v Hereford Ins. Co. (2018 NY Slip Op 51641(U)) [*1]

Right Aid Med. Supply Corp. v Hereford Ins. Co.

2018 NY Slip Op 51641(U) [61 Misc 3d 142(A)]

Decided on November 16, 2018

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This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 November 16, 2018

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

PRESENT: : MICHAEL L. PESCE, P.J., THOMAS P. ALIOTTA, DAVID ELLIOT, JJ
2016-1366 K C

Right Aid Medical Supply Corp., as Assignee of Quezada, Mery M., Respondent,
against
Hereford Insurance Co., Appellant.

Law Office of Lawrence R. Miles (Thomas Wolf of counsel), for appellant. The Rybak Firm, PLLC (Oleg Rybak of counsel), for respondent (no brief filed).

Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Devin P. Cohen, J.), entered January 27, 2016. The order, insofar as appealed from, denied defendant’s motion for 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 from so much of an order of the Civil Court as denied defendant’s motion for summary judgment which sought to dismiss the complaint on the ground that the action was premature because plaintiff had failed to provide requested verification.

While defendant made a prima facie showing that it had not received the requested verification, the affidavit submitted by plaintiff in opposition to defendant’s motion was sufficient to give rise to a presumption that the requested verification had been mailed to, and received by, defendant (see St. Vincent’s Hosp. of Richmond v. Government Empls. Ins. Co., 50 AD3d 1123 [2008]). As a triable issue of fact exists as to whether this action is premature (see Compas Med., P.C. v. Praetorian Ins. Co., 49 Misc 3d 152[A], 2015 NY Slip Op 51776[U] [App Term, 2d Dept, 2d, 11th & 13th Jud Dists 2015]), the Civil Court properly denied defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

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

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

ENTER:
Paul Kenny
Chief Clerk
Decision Date: November 16, 2018