Harvard Med., P.C. v Maya Assur. Co. |
2016 NY Slip Op 51529(U) [53 Misc 3d 141(A)] |
Decided on October 13, 2016 |
Appellate Term, Second Department |
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law ยง 431. |
This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports. |
Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County (Cheree A. Buggs, J.), entered January 9, 2014. The order granted defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
ORDERED that the order is reversed, with $30 costs, and defendant's motion for summary judgment is denied.
In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, plaintiff appeals from an order of the Civil Court which granted defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
Plaintiff correctly contends that the affidavit submitted by defendant did not sufficiently set forth a standard office practice or procedure that would ensure that the letters scheduling independent medical examinations (IMEs) had been properly addressed and mailed (see St. Vincent's Hosp. of Richmond v Government Empls. Ins. Co., 50 AD3d 1123 [2008]; see also Healing Art Acupuncture, P.C. v Maya Assur. Co., 47 Misc 3d 130[A], 2015 NY Slip Op 50387[U] [App Term, 2d Dept, 2d, 11th & 13th Jud Dists 2015]). As a result, defendant failed to demonstrate that plaintiff's assignor had failed to appear at duly scheduled IMEs (see Stephen Fogel Psychological, P.C. v Progressive Cas. Ins. Co., 35 AD3d 720 [2006]). Consequently, defendant is not entitled to summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
Accordingly, the order is reversed and defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is denied.
Pesce, P.J., Aliotta and Solomon, JJ., concur.