From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Five Boro Psychological Servs. P.C. v. Clarendon Nat'l Ins. Co.

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Dept., 2nd, 11th, & 13th Judicial Districts
Oct 12, 2011
2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 51858 (N.Y. App. Term 2011)

Opinion

2010-1148 K C.

10-12-2011

Five Boro Psychological Services, P.C. as Assignee of LAURA PURNELL, Respondent, v. Clarendon National Ins. Co., Appellant.


PRESENT: : , P.J., RIOS and STEINHARDT, JJ

Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Wavny Toussaint, J.), entered March 2, 2010. The order, insofar as appealed from, denied defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and, upon denying plaintiff's cross motion for summary judgment, found, pursuant to CPLR 3212 (g), that plaintiff had "established its prima facie case."

ORDERED that the order, insofar as appealed from, is reversed, without costs, and defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is granted.

In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, defendant appeals from so much of an order as denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and as, upon denying plaintiff's cross motion for summary judgment, found, pursuant to CPLR 3212 (g), that plaintiff had "established its prima facie case."

Defendant established that it had timely mailed the denial of claim form (see St. Vincent's Hosp. of Richmond v Government Empls. Ins. Co., 50 AD3d 1123 [2008]; Delta Diagnostic Radiology, P.C. v Chubb Group of Ins., 17 Misc 3d 16 [App Term, 2d & 11th Jud Dists 2007]), which denied the claim on the ground of lack of medical necessity. In support of its motion, defendant submitted, among other things, a sworn peer review report, which set forth a factual basis and medical rationale for the conclusion that there was a lack of medical necessity for the services at issue. Consequently, defendant established its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law (see 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]; Delta Diagnostic Radiology, P.C. v American Tr. Ins. Co., 18 Misc 3d 128[A], 2007 NY Slip Op 52455[U] [App Term, 2d & 11th Jud Dists 2007]; A. Khodadadi Radiology, P.C. v NY Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 16 Misc 3d 131[A], 2007 NY Slip Op 51342[U] [App Term, 2d & 11th Jud Dists 2007]), thereby shifting the burden to plaintiff to rebut defendant's showing (see Alur Med. Supply, Inc. v Clarendon Natl. Ins. Co., 27 Misc 3d 132[A], 2010 NY Slip Op 50700[U] [App Term, 2d, 11th & 13th Jud Dists 2010]; \sect f1 Pan Chiropractic, P.C. v Mercury Ins. Co., 24 Misc 3d 136[A], 2009 NY Slip Op 51495[U] [App Term, 2d, 11th & 13th Jud Dists 2009]). Defendant's showing that the services were not medically necessary was unrebutted by plaintiff. Accordingly, the order, insofar as appealed from, is reversed and defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is granted. We reach no other issue.

Pesce, P.J., Rios and Steinhardt, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Five Boro Psychological Servs. P.C. v. Clarendon Nat'l Ins. Co.

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Dept., 2nd, 11th, & 13th Judicial Districts
Oct 12, 2011
2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 51858 (N.Y. App. Term 2011)
Case details for

Five Boro Psychological Servs. P.C. v. Clarendon Nat'l Ins. Co.

Case Details

Full title:Five Boro Psychological Services, P.C. as Assignee of LAURA PURNELL…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Dept., 2nd, 11th, & 13th Judicial Districts

Date published: Oct 12, 2011

Citations

2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 51858 (N.Y. App. Term 2011)