Meridan Health Acupuncture, P.C. v Auto One Ins. Co., 2010 NY Slip Op 51263(U)(Dis. Ct. Suffolk 2010)
In this case, the District Court allowed a Notice to Admit to satisfy a plaintiff’s prima facie burden. It also found that a Defendant’s really cute, but completely inappropriate response, to the notice to admit to be deemed a nullity. The net effect, in the eyes of the District Court, was to deem the allegations set forth in the notice to admit to be deemed admitted.
I would have no problem with the court’s findings of facts and conclusions of law, provided the District Court transplanted itself to the Grand Concourse from 1850 New York Avenue. Thus, if the District Court, Third District, Huntington Part, sat in the hypothetical District Court, Third District, Bronx Part, then one should probably applaud this opinion. Furthermore, if the Appellate Division, Second Department overturns, in effect, Art of Healing, which many of us think is probably going to happen, then this decision would probably be correct. But, District Suffolk sits on Long Island, and cannot disregard the law as the Appellate Term in this Department has said it to be, viz, a prima facie case requires, among other things, a business record foundation for the entry of the bills into evidence.
But if you read this decision, note how the Court avoids citing Second Department precedent (when convenient), and even cites the one and only Appellate Division, First Department case that commented on what constitutes a prima facie case.
2 Responses
You assume that the higher authority the District Court must follow is the App Term 2nd. There is an Appellate Division. There is a clearly worded statute. There is a legislature. The district court does not have to blindly follow a blatantly illegal decision.
What the district court did was healthy for a democracy. It followed the true law. The equivalent of refusing to blindly follow an order to fire upon unarmed anti-war protestors.
JT, I’ve heard numerous District Court Judges (albeit Nassau, not Suffolk) utter words to the effect of “I’m deciding what I’m deciding and the Term can feel free to overturn me”… I’m not sure they’re as obligated to follow the Term as you might think. Especially when the Term is issuing decisions in derogation of everything from higher appellate authority, the rules of evidence and, as Mr. Zuppa points out, clearly worded statutes.
I think its admirable when a Judge will take that stance. Especially since its usually in favor of my side and against an obviously biased Appellate Term. 😉