Opinion
2018-1859 K C
12-13-2019
ACTIVE CARE MEDICAL SUPPLY CORP., as Assignee of Ramdeen, Tulsidai, Respondent, v. MVAIC, Appellant.
Marshall & Marshall, PLLC (Jeffrey Kadushin of counsel), for appellant. The Rybak Firm, PLLC (Damin J. Toell of counsel), for respondent.
Marshall & Marshall, PLLC (Jeffrey Kadushin of counsel), for appellant.
The Rybak Firm, PLLC (Damin J. Toell of counsel), for respondent.
PRESENT: MICHAEL L. PESCE, P.J., THOMAS P. ALIOTTA, BERNICE D. SIEGAL, JJ
ORDERED that the judgment is reversed, with $30 costs, the order entered July 20, 2018 is vacated, plaintiff's motion for summary judgment is denied and defendant's cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is granted.
In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, plaintiff moved for summary judgment and defendant Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corporation (sued herein as MVAIC) cross-moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. MVAIC's appeal from an order entered July 20, 2018 granting plaintiff's motion and denying MVAIC's cross motion is deemed to be from a judgment in favor of plaintiff in the principal sum of $2,369.81 that was entered on August 28, 2018 pursuant to the order (see CPLR 5501 [c] ).
MVAIC's motion papers established, prima facie, that the action had been commenced after the expiration of the three-year statute of limitations (see Kings Highway Diagnostic Imaging, P.C. v. MVAIC , 19 Misc 3d 69 [App Term, 2d Dept, 2d & 11th Jud Dists 2008]; see also 6D Farm Corp. v. Carr , 63 AD3d 903 [2009] ; Island ADC, Inc. v. Baldassano Architectural Group, P.C. , 49 AD3d 815 [2008] ). In opposition, plaintiff failed to raise an issue of fact as to the action's timeliness (see Precision Radiology Servs., P.C. v. MVAIC , 34 Misc 3d 126[A], 2011 NY Slip Op 52274[U] [App Term, 2d Dept, 2d, 11th & 13th Jud Dists 2011] ). In light of the foregoing, we reach no other issue.
Accordingly, the judgment is reversed, the order entered July 20, 2018 is vacated, plaintiff's motion for summary judgment is denied and defendant's cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is granted.
PESCE, P.J., ALIOTTA and SIEGAL, JJ., concur.