Triable issue of fact – medical necessityOctober 20, 2013

Hunt City Chiropractic, LLP v Chubb Indem. Ins. Co., 2013 NY Slip Op 51679(U)(App. Term 1st Dept. 2013)

“We agree that the conflicting medical expert opinions adduced by the parties sufficed to raise a triable issue as to the medical necessity of the chiropractic services underlying plaintiff’s first-party no-fault claim.”

This appear to be a post-IME cut off case.  I am curious if the affidavit discussed the treatment at issue, and whether there was supporting medical evidence to substantiate the medical appropriateness of the post-IME services.  Compare, Utica Acupuncture v. Interboro

One Response

  1. nycoolbreez says:

    Does the provider need to discuss the treatment at issue and provide supporting medical evidence(I thought testimony was evidence), when the provider can establish questions concerning the basis for defendant’s expert’s opinion? isnt raising a question of fact concerning a defense different from demonstrating entitlement to judgment?

Leave a Reply