Olga Bard Acupuncture, P.C. v Geico Ins. Co., 2010 NY Slip Op 51898(U)(App. Term 2d Dept. 2010)
This is an interesting case because the Appellate Term actually listed two of the four properly used acupuncture codes, and discussed an initial consultation code. These codes involved: 97810, 97811 and an initial consultation code.
“Consequently, so much of plaintiff’s motion as sought summary judgment on the second and third causes of action as well as the remaining portion of the first cause of action should have been denied, and so much of defendant’s cross motion as sought summary judgment dismissing the second and third causes of action and the remaining portion of the first cause of action should have been granted, as these causes of action sought to recover upon claims that were paid pursuant to the workers’ compensation fee schedule (see Great Wall Acupuncture, P.C., 26 Misc 3d 23; Great Wall Acupuncture, 16 Misc 3d 23).”
Therefore, “so much of plaintiff’s motion as sought summary judgment as to the second and third causes of action and as to claims bearing codes 97810 and 97811 included in the first cause of action is denied, so much of defendant’s cross motion as sought summary judgment dismissing the second, third, fourth and fifth causes of action as well as so much of the first cause of action as sought to recover for claims bearing codes 97810 and 97811 is granted…”
“However, defendant did not proffer sufficient evidence to warrant the dismissal of plaintiff’s claim in the sum of $109.34 for the initial acupuncture visit, which claim was included in plaintiff’s first cause of action”
