April 13, 2005

S&M Supply Inc. v Allstate Ins. Co. (2005 NYSlipOp 50543(U))

Headnote

The relevant facts of the case are that S&M Supply Inc. filed a motion for summary judgment in an action to recover first-party no-fault benefits for medical supplies furnished to its assignors, Naum Bergman and Paul Showun. However, the affidavit submitted in support of the motion did not establish that the affiant had the requisite personal knowledge. As a result, the affidavit was considered to be of no probative value. The main issue decided by the court was whether the affidavit submitted by the plaintiff had the necessary personal knowledge to support the motion for summary judgment. The court held that the affidavit did not meet the requirements for personal knowledge and therefore, the court properly denied the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment.

Reported in New York Official Reports at S&M Supply Inc. v Allstate Ins. Co. (2005 NYSlipOp 50543(U))

S&M Supply Inc. v Allstate Ins. Co. (2005 NYSlipOp 50543(U)) [*1]

S&M Supply Inc. v Allstate Ins. Co.

2005 NYSlipOp 50543(U)

Decided on April 13, 2005

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This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 April 13, 2005

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE TERM: 2nd and 11th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS

PRESENT: PESCE, P.J., GOLIA and RIOS, JJ.
2004-868 K C

S&M Supply Inc., a/a/o Naum Bergman and Paul Showun, Appellant,
against
Allstate Insurance Company, Respondent.

Appeal by plaintiff from so much of an order of the Civil Court, Kings County (E. Gesmer, J.), entered April 2, 2004, as denied its motion for summary judgment.

Order, insofar as appealed from, unanimously affirmed with $10 costs.

In this action to recover first-party no-fault benefits for medical supplies furnished to its assignors, plaintiff moved for summary judgment. However, in support of its motion, plaintiff relied upon an affidavit which did not establish that the affiant had the
requisite personal knowledge. As a result, the affidavit was of no probative value (see Republic W. Ins. Co. v RCR Bldrs., 268 AD2d 574 [2000]). Consequently, the court
properly denied plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320 [1986]). [*2]
Decision Date: April 13, 2005