Mosad Med., P.C. v MVAIC

[*1] Mosad Med., P.C. v MVAIC 2012 NY Slip Op 51632(U) Decided on August 7, 2012 Appellate Term, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.

Decided on August 7, 2012
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, SECOND DEPARTMENT, 2d, 11th and 13th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
PRESENT: : PESCE, P.J., RIOS and ALIOTTA, JJ
2011-615 Q C.

Mosad Medical, P.C. as Assignee of GLORIA CASTILLO, Respondent,

against

MVAIC, Appellant.

Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County (Rudolph E. Greco, Jr., J.), entered January 18, 2011, deemed from a judgment of the same court entered January 25, 2011 (see CPLR 5501 [c]). The judgment, entered pursuant to the January 18, 2011 order granting plaintiff's motion for summary judgment and denying defendant's cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, awarded plaintiff the principal sum of $182.18.

ORDERED that the judgment is reversed, without costs, the order granting plaintiff's motion for summary judgment and denying defendant's cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is vacated, plaintiff's motion for summary judgment is denied and defendant's cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is granted.

In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, defendant Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corporation (sued herein as MVAIC) appeals from an order of the Civil Court which granted plaintiff's motion for summary judgment and denied defendant's cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. A judgment was [*2]subsequently entered, from which the appeal is deemed to have been taken (see CPLR 5501 [c]).

Since plaintiff and its assignor were aware of the identity of the owner of the vehicle which struck the vehicle in which plaintiff's assignor was allegedly a passenger, plaintiff, as assignee, was required to exhaust its remedies against the vehicle's owner before seeking relief from MVAIC (Hauswirth v American Home Assur. Co., 244 AD2d 528 [1997]; Modern Art Med., P.C. v MVAIC, 22 Misc 3d 126[A], 2008 NY Slip Op 52586[U] [App Term, 2d & 11th Jud Dists 2008]; Doctor Liliya Med., P.C. v MVAIC, 21 Misc 3d 143[A], 2008 NY Slip Op 52453[U] [App Term, 2d & 11th Jud Dists 2008]; Dr. Abakin, D.C., P.C. v MVAIC, 21 Misc 3d 134[A], 2008 NY Slip Op 52186[U] [App Term, 2d & 11th Jud Dists 2008]; Complete Med. Servs. of NY, P.C. v MVAIC, 20 Misc 3d 137[A], 2008 NY Slip Op 51541[U] [App Term, 2d & 11th Jud Dists 2008]). As plaintiff did not demonstrate that it had exhausted its remedies against the owner of the vehicle (see e.g. Matter of Progressive Northeastern Ins. Co. v Barnes, 30 AD3d 523 [2006];
Matter of AIU Ins. Co. v Marciante, 8 AD3d 266 [2004]), the judgment is reversed, the order granting plaintiff's motion for summary judgment and denying defendant's cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is vacated, plaintiff's motion for summary judgment is denied and defendant's cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is granted.

Pesce, P.J., Rios and Aliotta, JJ., concur.
Decision Date: August 07, 2012