Opinion
2009-918 K C.
Decided June 15, 2011.
Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Sylvia G. Ash, J.), entered December 9, 2008. The order granted plaintiff's motion for summary judgment.
ORDERED that the order is reversed, without costs, and plaintiff's motion for summary judgment is denied.
PRESENT: GOLIA, J.P., PESCE and STEINHARDT, JJ.
In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits for supplies provided to plaintiff's assignor, plaintiff moved for summary judgment. In opposition to the motion, defendant argued that plaintiff did not make out its prima facie case and that there was no coverage since the accident was staged. Finding that the examination-under-oath transcripts were insufficient to establish an issue of fact as to whether the injuries arose from an insured incident, the Civil Court granted plaintiff's motion. This appeal by defendant ensued.
Contrary to defendant's contention, the affidavit submitted by plaintiff's billing manager was sufficient to establish that the documents annexed to plaintiff's moving papers were admissible pursuant to CPLR 4518 ( see Art of Healing Medicine, P.C. v Travelers Home Mar. Ins. Co. , 55 AD3d 644 ; Dan Med., P.C. v New York Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co. , 14 Misc 3d 44 [App Term, 2d 11th Jud Dists 2006]). The affidavit also established that the claim was mailed to defendant, as the affiant averred that she had personally mailed the claim, and that defendant did not deny the claim within 30 days. Consequently, plaintiff established its prima facie entitlement to summary judgment ( see Westchester Med. Ctr. v Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co. , 78 AD3d 1168 ), and the burden shifted to defendant to raise a triable issue of fact ( see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324).
Although defendant did not deny the claim at issue, it is well settled that the failure to deny a claim does not preclude an insurer from asserting a lack-of-coverage defense premised on the fact or founded belief that the alleged injury did not arise out of an insured incident ( see Central Gen. Hosp. v Chubb Group of Ins. Cos., 90 NY2d 195, 199). The affidavit of defendant's investigator is sufficient to demonstrate a founded belief that the alleged injuries did not arise out of an insured incident ( see Central Gen. Hosp., 90 NY2d at 199). Thus, plaintiff's motion for summary judgment should have been denied.
Accordingly, the order is reversed and plaintiff's motion for summary judgment is denied.
Golia, J.P., Pesce and Steinhardt, JJ., concur.