Opinion
570625/09.
Decided October 15, 2010.
Defendant, as limited by its brief, appeals from that portion of an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Bronx County (Raul Cruz, J.), entered January 12, 2009, which denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
PRESENT: McKeon, P.J., Hunter, Jr., J.
Order (Raul Cruz, J.), entered January 12, 2009, insofar as appealed from, reversed, with $10 costs, motion granted and complaint dismissed. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly.
We agree with defendant MVAIC that the appropriate statute of limitations for plaintiffs' claims seeking recovery of assigned first-party no-fault benefits from defendant, a statutorily created entity whose obligation to pay such benefits exists solely by virtue of statute, is three years ( see Shtarkman v Motor Veh. Acc. Indem. Corp., 20 Misc 3d 132[A], 2008 NY Slip Op 51447[U]; see also Matter of Motor Veh. Acc. Indem. Corp. v Aetna Cas. Sur. Co., 89 NY2d 214; cf. Mandarino v Travelers Property Cas. Ins. Co. , 37 AD3d 775 ). For the reasons outlined in Pinnacle Open MRI, P.C. v Republic Western Ins. Co. ( 18 Misc 3d 626 , 632-633), defendant is not analogous to a self-insurer, and the six-year statute of limitations applicable to claims against a self-insurer is therefore inapplicable to claims against defendant ( cf. Richard Denise, M.D., P.C. v New York City Trans. Auth. , 25 Misc 3d 13 ). Since plaintiffs' claims were interposed after the three-year limitations period expired, defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as time-barred should have been granted.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.