What’s a boy to do?August 27, 2013

Promed Durable Equip., Inc. v GEICO Ins., 2013 NY Slip Op 23283 (App. Term 2d Dept. 2013)

(A) The insufficient rebuttal

“In support of the branch of its cross motion seeking summary judgment dismissing so much of the complaint as sought to recover upon a claim for supplies furnished to plaintiff’s assignor on December 16, 2008, defendant submitted a peer review report which set forth a factual basis and medical rationale for the doctor’s determination that there was a lack of medical necessity for these supplies, on the ground, among others, that these supplies were superfluous, given that the assignor had already been involved in a treatment plan which included physical therapy and rehabilitation, which treatment plan, the peer reviewer stated, was sufficient to restore the assignor to the assignor’s pre-accident comfort level. In opposition, plaintiff submitted an affirmation by a doctor which failed to meaningfully refer to, let alone rebut, this determination”

(B) Errant Attorney

“In the instant case, the brief submitted on respondent’s behalf contained, among other things, pages denominated “Table of Authorities” and “Summary of the Argument” that merely state that these pages were “left blank intentionally.” The “Question Presented” stated only “WHAT’S A BOY TO DO?” The remainder of the respondent’s brief did not address the facts of this case or interpose any specific argument as to why the order from which defendant appealed should be affirmed. Based upon the above, and other statements in the respondent’s brief, we order Jonathan R. Vitarelli, Esq., Ilona Finkelshteyn, Esq., and counsel for defendant, to show cause why an order should or should not be made and entered imposing sanctions and costs, if any, against Jonathan R. Vitarelli, Esq., and Ilona Finkelshteyn, Esq.”

What’s a boy to do?  Well, “Girls just want to have fun”.

(C) From another blogger out there:  My Case


4 Responses

  1. Mike H says:

    I do believe “what’s a boy to do?” has now officially become the “Carlos Danger” of No-Fault. (Actually, the answer to the question is- file all your cases in arbitration.)

  2. Captain America says:

    If it were any other Court (except the 1st, and 2nd Dept and the 2nd Cir.) I might have something bad to say in defense of respect for Courts. But given that this was done to the App Term 2nd — a Wholly Owned Subsidiary of GEICO — I would make Jonathan R. Vitarelli, Esq. President of the United States.

    I would still deport Ilona Finkelshteyn, Esq. for being such a bad attorney which she attempts to overcome by coming off as a sophisticated beauty.

    Ilona you’re no Sophia Loren.

  3. Michael P.S. Hayes says:

    I know I’m a little late on this, but I felt compelled to chime in. The brief offered by Mr. Vitarelli(a/k/a Ilona Finkelshteyn a/k/a Carlos Danger…or whatever other aliases might be floating around) might actually be more absurd than deciding medical necessity issues with a summary judgment motion. We might as well skip doing trials, and settle these disputes in steel cage matches. I know an arbitrator who’s son works for Vince McMahon. Maybe he can hook us up.

Leave a Reply