Y.A.M. Med. Supply, Inc. v Travelers Indem. Co.

[*1] Y.A.M. Med. Supply, Inc. v Travelers Indem. Co. 2017 NY Slip Op 51039(U) Decided on August 11, 2017 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 This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 11, 2017
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, SECOND DEPARTMENT, 2d, 11th and 13th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
PRESENT: : MICHELLE WESTON, J.P., THOMAS P. ALIOTTA, DAVID ELLIOT, JJ
2016-143 K C

Y.A.M. Medical Supply, Inc., as Assignee of Edwin Franco, Respondent,

against

Travelers Indemnity Co., Appellant.

Law Offices of Aloy O. Ibuzor (Alla Peker, Esq.), for appellant. Gary Tsirelman, P.C. (Irena Golodkeyer, Esq.), for respondent.

Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Richard Montelione, J.), entered October 9, 2015. The order denied defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and, upon searching the record, granted plaintiff summary judgment on so much of the complaint as sought to recover upon a bill for $502.63.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with $25 costs.

In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, defendant moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that plaintiff's claims were premature because plaintiff had failed to provide requested verification. The Civil Court denied defendant's motion and, upon searching the record, granted plaintiff summary judgment on so much of the complaint as sought to recover upon a bill for $502.63.

Defendant's only argument with respect to the bill for $502.63— that there was no basis to search the record —lacks merit, as a court may search the record and award summary judgment based upon admissions and documentary evidence (see e.g. Arista Real Estate Holdings, Inc. v Kemalettin, 133 AD3d 696 [2015]). Defendant's brief does not provide a basis upon which to disturb the Civil Court's determination that there is a triable issue of fact regarding the adequacy of plaintiff's responses to defendant's verification requests with respect to the other bill, for $1,136.01.

Accordingly, the order is affirmed.

WESTON, J.P., ALIOTTA and ELLIOT, JJ., concur.

ENTER:
Paul Kenny
Chief Clerk
Decision Date: August 11, 2017