| Wyckoff Hgts. Med. Ctr. v Country-Wide Ins. Co. |
| 2010 NY Slip Op 02552 [71 AD3d 1009] |
| March 23, 2010 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| Wyckoff Heights Medical Center, as Assignee of RamonaRodriguez, Plaintiff, and New York and Presbyterian Hospital, as Assignee of Joaquin Benitez,Respondent, v Country-Wide Insurance Company,Appellant. |
—[*1] Joseph Henig, P.C., Bellmore, N.Y. (Kelly Caputo of counsel), for respondent.
In an action to recover no-fault medical payments under two insurance contracts, thedefendant appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Phelan, J.), enteredJune 4, 2009, which, upon an order of the same court entered May 14, 2009, granting that branchof the plaintiffs' motion which was for summary judgment on the complaint insofar as assertedby the plaintiff New York and Presbyterian Hospital, as assignee of Joaquin Benitez, anddenying that branch of the defendant's cross motion which was for summary judgmentdismissing the complaint insofar as asserted by that plaintiff, is in favor of that plaintiff andagainst it in the principal sum of $56,235.43.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
The plaintiff New York and Presbyterian Hospital, as assignee of Joaquin Benitez(hereinafter the hospital), established its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of lawby demonstrating that the necessary billing forms were mailed to and received by the defendantCountry-Wide Insurance Company (hereinafter the insurer) and that payment of no-fault benefitswas overdue (see Insurance Law § 5106 [a]; 11 NYCRR 65-3.8 [a] [1]; NewYork & Presbyt. Hosp. v Countrywide Ins. Co., 44 AD3d 729, 730 [2007]; New York &Presbyt. Hosp. v Selective Ins. Co. of Am., 43 AD3d 1019, 1020 [2007]; WestchesterMed. Ctr. v Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 40 AD3d 981, 981-982 [2007]; Nyack Hosp. vMetropolitan Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., 16 AD3d 564 [2005]; see generally Alvarez vProspect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 325 [1986]).
In opposition, the insurer failed to raise a triable issue of fact. Contrary to the insurer'scontention, the hospital's submission of a completed hospital facility form (NYS form N-F 5)within 45 days after services were rendered satisfied the written notice requirement set forth in11 NYCRR 65-1.1 (see 11 NYCRR 65-3.3 [d]; cf. New York & Presbyt. Hosp. vAmerican Tr. Ins. Co., 45 AD3d 822, 823 [2007]; St. Vincent's Hosp. & Med. Ctr. vCountry Wide Ins. Co., 24 AD3d 748, 749 [2005]).[*2]
Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted thatbranch of the plaintiffs' motion which was for summary judgment on the complaint insofar asasserted by the hospital and denied that branch of the insurer's cross motion which was forsummary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted by the hospital. Mastro, J.P.,Leventhal, Lott and Austin, JJ., concur.