Opinion
2006-1661 K C.
Decided on January 4, 2008.
Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Dolores L. Waltrous, J.), entered June 22, 2006. The order, insofar as appealed from, denied plaintiff's motion for summary judgment.
Order, insofar as appealed from, affirmed with $10 costs.
PRESENT: WESTON PATTERSON, J.P., GOLIA and BELEN, JJ.
In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, plaintiff's motion for summary judgment was supported by an affirmation from plaintiff's counsel, an affidavit by an officer of plaintiff, and various documents annexed thereto. The affidavit executed by plaintiff's officer stated in a conclusory manner that the
documents attached to plaintiff's motion papers were plaintiff's business records. The court below denied the motion, finding that defendant provided proof of timely verification requests and of a timely denial based upon a peer review. This appeal by plaintiff ensued.
Since the affidavit submitted by plaintiff's officer was insufficient to establish that said officer possessed personal knowledge of plaintiff's practices and procedures so as to lay a foundation for the admission, as business records, of the documents annexed to plaintiff's moving papers, plaintiff failed to make a prima facie showing of its entitlement to summary judgment ( Dan Med., P.C. v New York Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 14 Misc 3d 44 [App Term, 2d 11th Jud Dists 2006]). Consequently, the order denying plaintiff's motion for summary judgment is affirmed, albeit on other grounds.
Weston Patterson, J.P., Golia and Belen, JJ., concur.