Key Takeaway
Civil Court properly grants stay motion when declaratory judgment action pending - avoiding inconsistent adjudications in no-fault insurance cases.
Compas Med., P.C. v Geico Ins. Co., 2013 NY Slip Op 52016(U)(App. Term 2d Dept 2013)
“In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, defendant moved to stay the action, pursuant to CPLR 2201, pending a final determination of a declaratory judgment action that had been commenced by defendant in the Supreme Court, Nassau County, entitled Geico Ins. Co. v Andre (Index No. 8085/2011). In that action, Geico alleged that the defendants named therein had engaged in a large-scale illegal scheme involving staged accidents and fraudulent billing practices and therefore Geico sought a declaration that it was not obligated to pay, among other things, no-fault benefits to those defendants. Both plaintiff and its assignor are named as defendants in the declaratory judgment action.
“ court has broad discretion to grant a stay in order to avoid the risk of inconsistent adjudications, application of proof and potential waste of judicial resources” (Zonghetti v [*2]Jeromack, 150 AD2d 561, 563 ). Under the circumstances presented herein, it was not an improvident exercise of discretion for the Civil Court to grant defendant’s motion to stay this action pending the resolution of the Supreme Court declaratory judgment action (see CPLR 2201).”
Great decision!
Related Articles
- Legal Document Quality Issues in New York Personal Injury Cases: Lessons from Global Liberty Insurance v. Tyrell
- Court takes judicial notice of Supreme Court declaratory judgment action
- Declaratory judgment action and Special proceeding are identical – dismissal denied
- First Department upholds EUO DJ victory
- Denial of Claims
Legal Update (February 2026): Since this 2013 decision, CPLR 2201 stay provisions and related procedural rules governing concurrent litigation may have been amended through legislative changes or court rule modifications. Additionally, appellate court interpretations of discretionary stay standards in no-fault insurance contexts may have evolved. Practitioners should verify current CPLR provisions and recent case law before relying on the procedural standards discussed in this post.
