Opinion
2009-402 Q C.
Decided March 10, 2010.
Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County (Leslie J. Purificacion, J.), entered November 18, 2008. The order, insofar as appealed from, denied the branch of defendant's motion seeking summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
ORDERED that the order, insofar as appealed from, is affirmed without costs.
PRESENT: RIOS, J.P., PESCE and STEINHARDT, JJ.
In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, defendant moved for, among other things, summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground of lack of medical necessity. As limited by the brief, defendant appeals from so much of the order of the Civil Court as denied the branch of defendant's motion seeking summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
The affidavit and peer review report of defendant's chiropractor set forth a factual basis and medical rationale for the chiropractor's conclusion that there was a lack of medical necessity for the services rendered ( Exclusive Med. Supply, Inc. v Mercury Ins. Group , 25 Misc 3d 136 [A], 2009 NY Slip Op 52273[U] [App Term, 2d, 11th 13th Jud Dists 2009]; Delta Diagnostic Radiology, P.C. v Integon Natl. Ins. Co. , 24 Misc 3d 136[A], 2009 NY Slip Op 51502[U] [App Term, 2d, 11th 13th Jud Dists 2009]). However, the affidavit of plaintiff's treating chiropractor, submitted in opposition to defendant's motion for summary judgment, was sufficient to demonstrate the existence of a triable issue of fact as to the medical necessity of the services rendered ( cf. Innovative Chiropractic, P.C. v Mercury Ins. Co. , 25 Misc 3d 137 [A], 2009 NY Slip Op 52321[U] [App Term, 2d, 11th 13th Jud Dists 2009]; Pan Chiropractic, P.C. v Mercury Ins. Co. , 24 Misc 3d 136 [A], 2009 NY Slip Op 51495[U], *2 [App Term, 2d, 11th 13th Jud Dists 2009]). Accordingly, the order, insofar as appealed from, is affirmed.
Rios, J.P., Pesce and Steinhardt, JJ., concur.