From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Marmol v. Mutino

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Feb 15, 2022
202 A.D.3d 540 (N.Y. App. Div. 2022)

Opinion

15270 Index No. 300802/11 Case No. 2021–01161

02-15-2022

Romi MARMOL, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. Joseph MUTINO, Defendant, City of New York Human Resources Administration Office of Legal Affairs Liens and Recovery, Nonparty–Respondent.

Gardiner & Nolan, Brooklyn (William Gardiner of counsel), for appellant. Georgia M. Pestana, Corporation Counsel, New York (Amy McCamphill of counsel), for City of New York Human Resources Administration, respondent.


Gardiner & Nolan, Brooklyn (William Gardiner of counsel), for appellant.

Georgia M. Pestana, Corporation Counsel, New York (Amy McCamphill of counsel), for City of New York Human Resources Administration, respondent.

Manzanet–Daniels, J.P., Oing, Gonza´lez, Shulman, Higgitt, JJ.

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Doris M. Gonzalez, J.), entered on or about March 9, 2021, which denied plaintiff's motion to vacate or reduce a medical lien held by nonparty respondent City of New York Human Resources Administration (HRA), unanimously reversed, on the law and the facts, without costs, and the motion to vacate the lien granted. HRA asserted a lien on the proceeds of plaintiff's settlement of an action arising out of an automobile accident in an amount representing the total amount of the medical bills it paid in connection with the treatment of the injuries plaintiff sustained in the accident (see Social Services Law § 104–b ). However, plaintiff was barred from suing for medical expenses, because her basic economic losses were less than $50,000 (see Insurance Law § 5102[a] ). Moreover, in light of the particular record before us, no portion of the proceeds of the settlement represents medical expenses, and HRA may not recover any portion of the proceeds for its medical costs (see Arkansas Dept. of Health & Human Servs. v. Ahlborn, 547 U.S. 268, 126 S.Ct. 1752, 164 L.Ed.2d 459 [2006] ; see also Wos v. E.M.A., 568 U.S. 627, 133 S.Ct. 1391, 185 L.Ed.2d 471 [2013] ).


Summaries of

Marmol v. Mutino

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Feb 15, 2022
202 A.D.3d 540 (N.Y. App. Div. 2022)
Case details for

Marmol v. Mutino

Case Details

Full title:Romi MARMOL, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. Joseph MUTINO, Defendant, City of New…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Date published: Feb 15, 2022

Citations

202 A.D.3d 540 (N.Y. App. Div. 2022)
159 N.Y.S.3d 670

Citing Cases

Raizner v. M&G Taxi, LLC

Under New York Insurance Law 5102 (a), "there shall be no right of recovery for noneconomic loss, except in…