SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, SECOND DEPARTMENT, 2d, 11th and 13th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS New York Supreme and/or Appellate Courts
December 21, 2012
AVENUE I MEDICAL, P.C. AS ASSIGNEE OF VELDA ALEXANDRE,
APPELLANT, - -
GEICO INDEMNITY CO.,
Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County (Leslie J. Purificacion, J.), entered August 9, 2010.
Avenue I Med., P.C. v GEICO Indem. Co.
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This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 denied plaintiff's motion for summary judgment.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with $25 costs.
In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, plaintiff appeals from an order of the Civil Court which denied plaintiff's motion for summary judgment.
A no-fault provider establishes its prima facie entitlement to summary
judgment by proof of the submission to the defendant of a claim form,
proof of the fact and the amount of the loss sustained, and proof
either that the defendant had failed to pay or deny the claim within
the requisite 30-day period, or that the defendant had issued a timely
denial of claim that was conclusory, vague or without merit as a
matter of law (see Insurance Law § 5106 [a]; Westchester Med. Ctr. v
Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co., 78 AD3d 1168 ; Ave T MPC Corp. v Auto
One Ins. Co., 32 Misc 3d 128[A], 2011 NY Slip Op 51292[U] [App Term,
2d, 11th & 13th Jud Dists 2011]). Here, plaintiff's affidavit failed to establish that the documents annexed to plaintiff's motion for
summary judgment constituted proof of the fact and the amount of the loss sustained (see CPLR 4518; Art of Healing Medicine, P.C. v
Travelers Home & Mar. Ins. Co., 55 AD3d 644 ; Dan Med.,
P.C. v New York Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 14 Misc 3d 44 [App Term, 2d
& 11th Jud Dists 2006]).
Accordingly, the order is affirmed.
Pesce, P.J., Weston and Rios, JJ., concur. Decision Date: December 21, 2012
© 1992-2013 VersusLaw Inc.