February 27, 2009
Velen Med. Supply, Inc. v Country-Wide Ins. Co. (2009 NY Slip Op 50343(U))
Headnote
Reported in New York Official Reports at Velen Med. Supply, Inc. v Country-Wide Ins. Co. (2009 NY Slip Op 50343(U))
Velen Med. Supply, Inc. v Country-Wide Ins. Co. |
2009 NY Slip Op 50343(U) [22 Misc 3d 138(A)] |
Decided on February 27, 2009 |
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This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports. |
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
APPELLATE TERM: 2nd, 11th and 13th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
PRESENT: : PESCE, P.J., GOLIA and RIOS, JJ
2007-1406 Q C.
against
Country-Wide Insurance Company, Appellant.
Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County (Diane A. Lebedeff, J.), entered August 13, 2007, deemed from a judgment of the same court entered August 30, 2007 (see CPLR 5501 [c]). The judgment, entered pursuant to the August 13, 2007 order granting plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and denying defendant’s cross motion for summary judgment, awarded plaintiff the principal sum of $1,131.
Judgment reversed without costs, so much of the order as granted plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment vacated, plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment denied, and matter remanded to the Civil Court for all further proceedings.
In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, the court granted plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and denied defendant’s cross motion for summary judgment. The instant appeal by defendant ensued. A judgment was subsequently entered.
On appeal, defendant argues that the affidavit by plaintiff’s billing manager, submitted in
support of plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, failed to lay a proper foundation for the
admission of the documents annexed to plaintiff’s moving papers and that, as a result, plaintiff
failed to establish a prima facie case. We agree. The affidavit submitted by plaintiff’s billing
manager was insufficient to demonstrate that she possessed personal knowledge of plaintiff’s
[*2]practices and procedures so as to lay a foundation for the
admission, as business records, of the documents annexed to plaintiff’s moving papers.
Accordingly, plaintiff failed to make a prima facie showing of its entitlement to summary
judgment (see Art of Healing Medicine,
P.C. v Travelers Home & Mar. Ins. Co., 15 Misc 3d 144[A], 2007 NY Slip Op
51161[U] [App Term, 2d & 11th Jud Dists 2007], affd 55 AD3d 644 [2008]; Bath Med. Supply, Inc. v Deerbrook Ins.
Co., 14 Misc 3d 135[A], 2007 NY Slip Op 50179[U] [App Term, 2d & 11th Jud Dists
2007]; Dan Med. P.C. v New York
Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 14 Misc 3d 44 [App Term, 2d & 11th Jud Dists 2006]).
Consequently, the judgment is reversed, so much of the
order as granted plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment is vacated, and plaintiff’s motion
for summary judgment is denied. We note that no issue is raised with respect to the denial of
defendant’s cross motion for summary judgment.
Pesce, P.J., Golia and Rios, JJ., concur.
Decision Date: February 27, 2009