Flatbush Chiropractic, P.C. v State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 2013 NY Slip Op 50758(U)(App. Term 2d Dept. 2013)
“Contrary to plaintiff’s argument, the affidavits submitted by defendant established that the EUO scheduling letters and the denial of claim forms had been timely mailed (see St. Vincent’s Hosp. of Richmond v Government Empls. Ins. Co., 50 AD3d 1123 [2008]; Delta Diagnostic Radiology, P.C. v Chubb Group of Ins., 17 Misc 3d 16 [App Term, 2d & 11th Jud Dists 2007]). Furthermore, since plaintiff does not claim to have responded in any way to the EUO requests, its [*2]objections regarding the EUO requests will not now be heard (see Viviane Etienne Med. Care, P.C. v State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 35 Misc 3d 127[A], 2012 NY Slip Op 50579[U] [App Term, 2d, 11th & 13th Jud Dists 2012]; Crescent Radiology, PLLC v American Tr. Ins. Co., 31 Misc 3d 134[A], 2011 NY Slip Op 50622[U] [App Term, 9th & 10th Jud Dists 2011]).”
This is a condensed statement of fact and law on the EUO provider no-show front.
One Response
The Court is wring here. State Farm affidavits are attrocious. SIU people have knowledge of the mailing since when. Also, you can’t get SIU and Claim file durin litigation is also mularky. Its a Rivkin representing State Farm, is there anything else to say.