From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Melbourne Med. P.C. v. Utica Mut. Ins. Co.

Appellate Term of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 7, 2004
2004 N.Y. Slip Op. 50584 (N.Y. App. Term 2004)

Opinion

No. 2003-765 QC.

Decided June 7, 2004.

Appeal by defendant from an order of the Civil Court, Queens County (K. Kerrigan, J.), entered January 15, 2003, denying its motion for summary judgment and granting plaintiff's cross motion for summary judgment.

Order unanimously affirmed without costs.

PRESENT: PESCE, P.J., ARONIN and PATTERSON, JJ.


Upon a review of the record, we are of the opinion that the defendant's motion for summary judgment was properly denied, and plaintiff's cross motion for summary judgment properly granted, for the reasons stated in Melbourne Med. P.C. v. Utica Mut. Ins. Co. (NO. 2003-753 Q C, decided herewith).


Summaries of

Melbourne Med. P.C. v. Utica Mut. Ins. Co.

Appellate Term of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 7, 2004
2004 N.Y. Slip Op. 50584 (N.Y. App. Term 2004)
Case details for

Melbourne Med. P.C. v. Utica Mut. Ins. Co.

Case Details

Full title:MELBOURNE MEDICAL, P.C. Assignee of JOSE CABREJA, Respondent, v. UTICA…

Court:Appellate Term of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Jun 7, 2004

Citations

2004 N.Y. Slip Op. 50584 (N.Y. App. Term 2004)

Citing Cases

Metro Med. Diagnostics, P.C. v. Allstate Ins. Co.

[t]he fraud which defendant is claiming as a defense to payment of this claim is fraud by the plaintiff…

Carepluss Med. Sup. Inc. v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins.

Thus, where a fraud defense is premised upon allegations that the collision underlying the claim was a staged…