Parisien v Metlife Auto & Home

Annotate this Case
[*1] Parisien v Metlife Auto & Home 2020 NY Slip Op 50846(U) Decided on July 10, 2020 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 This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.

Decided on July 10, 2020
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, SECOND DEPARTMENT, 2d, 11th and 13th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
PRESENT: : MICHELLE WESTON, J.P., THOMAS P. ALIOTTA, BERNICE D. SIEGAL, JJ
2018-1736 K C

Jules Francois Parisien, M.D., as Assignee of Phillips, John, Appellant,

against

Metlife Auto & Home, Respondent.

The Rybak Firm, PLLC (Damin J. Toell and Richard Rozhik of counsel), for appellant. Bruno, Gerbino & Soriano, LLP (Nathan Shapiro of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Rosemarie Montalbano, J.), entered May 10, 2018. The order granted defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and denied plaintiff's cross motion for summary judgment.

ORDERED that the order is modified by providing that defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is denied; as so modified, the order is affirmed, without costs.

In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, plaintiff appeals from an order of the Civil Court entered May 10, 2018 which granted defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and denied plaintiff's cross motion for summary judgment.

For the reasons stated in Parisien, as Assignee of Phillips, John v MetLife Auto & Home (___ Misc 3d ___, 2020 NY Slip Op _____ [appeal No. 2018-1727 K C], decided herewith), the order is modified by providing that defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is denied.

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



ENTER:
Paul Kenny
Chief Clerk
Decision Date: July 10, 2020

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.