AR Med. Rehabilitation, P.C. v MVAIC

[*1] AR Med. Rehabilitation, P.C. v MVAIC 2010 NY Slip Op 50828(U) [27 Misc 3d 135(A)] Decided on May 10, 2010 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 This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 May 10, 2010
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
APPELLATE TERM: 2nd, 11th and 13th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
PRESENT: : WESTON, J.P., GOLIA and RIOS, JJ
2008-1927 K C.

AR Medical Rehabilitation, P.C. a/a/o Donnovan Greaves, Appellant,

against

MVAIC, Respondent.

Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Ellen M. Spodek, J.), entered January 17, 2008. The order, insofar as appealed from, granted so much of defendant's motion for summary judgment as sought dismissal of plaintiff's cause of action seeking to recover upon a claim in the sum of $3,903.92.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed without costs.

In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, defendant Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corporation (sued herein as MVAIC) moved for summary judgment on the ground that plaintiff's claims were submitted more than 45 days after the services at issue were furnished. Plaintiff opposed the motion. By order entered January 17, 2008, insofar as appealed from, the Civil Court granted so much of MVAIC's motion for summary judgment as sought dismissal with respect to plaintiff's claim seeking the sum of $3,903.92.

It is undisputed that plaintiff was required to submit its claim form to MVAIC within 45 days after the services at issue were rendered and that plaintiff did not do so (see Insurance Department Regulations [11 NYCRR] § 65-1.1; Nir v MVAIC, 17 Misc 3d 134[A], 2007 NY Slip Op 52124[U] [App Term, 2d & 11th Jud Dists 2007]; NY Arthroscopy & Sports Medicine PLLC v Motor Veh. Acc. Indem. Corp., 15 Misc 3d 89 [App Term, 1st Dept 2007]). MVAIC's denial of plaintiff's claim for $3,903.92, based upon its untimely submission, also [*2]informed plaintiff that it could excuse the delay if plaintiff provided "written justification" for the delay (see Insurance Department Regulations [11 NYCRR] § 65-3.3 [e]; see also Matter of Medical Socy. of State of NY v Serio, 100 NY2d 854, 862-863 [2003]; Nir, 17 Misc 3d 134[A], 2007 NY Slip Op 52124[U]). In opposition to MVAIC's motion for summary judgment, plaintiff did not establish that it had provided MVAIC with a written justification for its untimely submission of the claim form seeking the sum of $3,903.92. As plaintiff's remaining contentions lack merit, the order, insofar as appealed from, is affirmed.

Weston, J.P., Golia and Rios, JJ., concur.
Decision Date: May 10, 2010