AFFIRMATION BY CARRIER’S ATTORNEY’S NOT ENOUGH TO PROVE NO SHOW

AFFIRMATION BY CARRIER’S ATTORNEY’S NOT ENOUGH TO PROVE NO SHOW

Alleviation Medical Services, P.C. v. Hertz Co., Slip Copy, 2016 WL 1188543 (Table), 2016 N.Y. Slip Op. 50371(U)

Carrier tried to use partner in in the law firm representing the carrier to prove that Plaintiff failed to appear.  The Court said:

Contrary to defendant’s contention, the affirmation by a partner in the law firm retained by defendant to conduct examinations under oath (EUOs) of plaintiff did not satisfy defendant’s burden of presenting proof by someone with personal knowledge of the nonappearance of plaintiff at the EUOs in question (see Alrof, Inc. v Safeco Natl. Ins. Co., 39 Misc 3d 130[A], 2013 NY Slip Op 50458[U] [App Term, 2d Dept, 2d, 11th & 13th Jud Dists 2013]; Bright Med. Supply Co. v IDS Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., 40 Misc 3d 130[A], 2013 NY Slip Op 51123[U] [App Term, 2d Dept, 2d, 11th & 13th Jud Dists 2013]). As a result, defendant failed to establish, as a matter of law, defendant’s entitlement to summary judgment dismissing the complaint. However, since plaintiff failed to show that it had appeared for either of the EUOs, plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment should have been denied, as plaintiff did not establish that the denial of claim form was conclusory, vague or without merit as a matter of law (see Westchester Med. Ctr. v Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co., 78 AD3d 1168 [2010]; Ave T MPC Corp. v Auto One Ins. Co., 32 Misc 3d 128[A], 2011 NY Slip Op 51292[U] [App Term, 2d Dept, 2d, 11th & 13th Jud Dists 2011]).

Leave Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *