Opinion
2021-50998
10-26-2021
Brookside Physical Therapy a/a/o Crummell Curtis, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. MVAIC, Defendant-Appellant.
Unpublished Opinion
PRESENT: Edmead, P.J., McShan, Hagler, JJ.
PER CURIAM
Defendant appeals from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County (Jose A. Padilla, Jr., J.), entered November 5, 2020, which denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
Order (Jose A. Padilla, Jr., J.), entered November 5, 2020, reversed, with $10 costs, motion granted, and the complaint dismissed. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly.
Defendant MVAIC's submission in support of its motion for summary judgment established, prima facie, that there had been no timely filing of a notice of intention to make claim (see Insurance Law § 5208[a]) and that no notice of the accident had been given "to a police, peace, or judicial officer" within 24 hours of the alleged occurrence (Insurance Law § 5208[a][2][A]). Thus, conditions precedent to plaintiff's right to apply for payment of no-fault benefits from defendant had not been satisfied (see SML Acupuncture P.C. v MVAIC, 55 Misc.3d 138 [A], 2017 NY Slip Op 50539[U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2017] ; Karina K. Acupuncture PC v MVAIC, 55 Misc.3d 138 [A], 2017 NY Slip Op 50537[U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2017]). In opposition, plaintiff failed to raise any triable issue. MVAIC's failure to timely deny the claim does not preclude it from asserting a lack of coverage defense (see Matter of MVAIC v Interboro Med. Care & Diagnostic PC, 73 A.D.3d 667 [2010]).