Opinion
No. 2020-172 K C
06-10-2022
Jules Francois Parisien, M.D., as Assignee of Phucien, Fritz G., Appellant, v. Metlife Auto & Home, Respondent.
The Rybak Firm, PLLC (Damien J. Toell and Richard Rozhik of counsel), for appellant. Bruno, Gerbino, Soriano & Aitken, LLP (Susan B. Eisner of counsel), for respondent.
Unpublished Opinion
The Rybak Firm, PLLC (Damien J. Toell and Richard Rozhik of counsel), for appellant.
Bruno, Gerbino, Soriano & Aitken, LLP (Susan B. Eisner of counsel), for respondent.
PRESENT: THOMAS P. ALIOTTA, P.J., MICHELLE WESTON, WAVNY TOUSSAINT, JJ
Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Ira R. Greenberg, J.), entered October 7, 2019. The order granted defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and denied plaintiff's cross 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 granted defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that plaintiff had failed to appear for duly scheduled examinations under oath, and denied plaintiff's cross motion for summary judgment.
Plaintiff's sole argument as to defendant's motion for summary judgment is not properly before this court as it is being raised for the first time on appeal, and we decline to consider it (see Joe v Upper Room Ministries, Inc., 88 A.D.3d 963 [2011]; Gulf Ins. Co. v Kanen, 13 A.D.3d 579 [2004]; Mind & Body Acupuncture, P.C. v Elrac, Inc., 48 Misc.3d 139 [A], 2015 NY Slip Op 51219[U] [App Term, 2d Dept, 2d, 11th & 13th Jud Dists 2015]). Consequently, plaintiff has demonstrated no basis to disturb the order which granted defendant's motion and denied plaintiff's cross motion.
Accordingly, the order is affirmed.
ALIOTTA, P.J., WESTON and TOUSSAINT, JJ., concur.