One To One Rehab PT, P.C. v Allstate Ins. Co.

[*1] One To One Rehab PT, P.C. v Allstate Ins. Co. 2018 NY Slip Op 50041(U) Decided on January 12, 2018 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 This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 January 12, 2018
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, SECOND DEPARTMENT, 2d, 11th and 13th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
PRESENT: : MICHELLE WESTON, J.P., THOMAS P. ALIOTTA, DAVID ELLIOT, JJ
2016-463 Q C

One To One Rehab PT, P.C., as Assignee of Saibou, Bolasi, Appellant,

against

Allstate Insurance Company, Respondent.

The Rybak Firm, PLLC (Damin J. Toell, Esq.), for appellant. Law Offices of Peter C. Merani, P.C. (Eric M. Wahrburg, Esq.), for respondent.

Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County (Joseph J. Esposito, J.), entered January 19, 2016. The order denied plaintiff's motion for summary judgment and granted defendant's cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

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

In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, plaintiff moved for summary judgment. Defendant opposed the motion and cross-moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that defendant did not provide insurance coverage for the vehicle in question on the date of the accident at issue. By order entered January 19, 2016, the Civil Court denied plaintiff's motion and granted defendant's cross motion.

In support of its cross motion and in opposition to plaintiff's motion, defendant submitted an affidavit by its employee who described the details of her search of defendant's records and stated that her search had revealed that there was no coverage by defendant for the vehicle in question on the date of the accident. We find that defendant's affidavit was sufficient to demonstrate, prima facie, that plaintiff's claims did not arise out of a covered incident (see Central Gen. Hosp. v Chubb Group of Ins. Cos., 90 NY2d 195, 199 [1997]). As plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact in opposition to defendant's cross motion, the Civil Court properly denied plaintiff's motion for summary judgment and granted defendant's cross motion for [*2]summary judgment dismissing the complaint (see Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557 [1980]).

Accordingly, the order is affirmed.

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

ENTER:
Paul Kenny
Chief Clerk
Decision Date: January 12, 2018