Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Wavny Toussaint, J.), entered October 30, 2009.
Five Boro Psychological Servs., P.C. v MVAIC
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This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.
PRESENT: PESCE, P.J., WESTON and RIOS, JJ
The order, insofar as appealed from as limited by the brief, granted plaintiff's cross motion for summary judgment.
ORDERED that the order, insofar as appealed from, is affirmed, without costs.
In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, defendant Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corporation (sued herein as MVAIC) appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order as granted plaintiff's cross motion for summary judgment.
MVAIC contends that there is an issue of fact as to whether plaintiff's assignor's injuries were the result of a motor vehicle accident. MVAIC's sole proof in support of its contention consisted of an uncertified copy of a police report, which merely recorded a hearsay statement. Contrary to MVAIC's contention, this showing was insufficient to demonstrate the existence of a triable issue of fact. Accordingly, the order, insofar as appealed from, is affirmed (cf. Matter of Manhattan & Bronx Surface Tr. Operating Auth. (Gholson), 71 AD2d 1004 ).
Pesce, P.J., Weston and Rios, JJ., concur.
Decision Date: April 02, 2012
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw ...