37 Ave Med., P.C. v Metlife Auto & Home Ins. Co., 2015 NY Slip Op 51293(U)(Civ. Ct. Kings Co. 2015)
How do you not research core issues before you tell a client you want to take a case to trial? I hope the client was told that Rhode Island law would not support their position and the client voluntarily opted to take a chance the issue. Also, if you are going to apply Rhode Island law, what is the standard for collection of medical bills? Is there a requirement that the provider prove the services are necessary and related to injury at hand. Alternatively, if the policy issuance state is not a no-fault state (neither compulsory or through election), wouldn’t the better argument be that New York law should apply viz the deemer, including the fraudulent procurement rules? Certain things never cease to amaze me.
Good job to Evan Polansky- we have something in two weeks right?
