Acupuncture Approach, P.C. v NY Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 2018 NY Slip Op 51601(U) (App. Term 2d Dept. 2018)
I missed this one originally. And this was a big one.
” While plaintiff argues that defendant did not mail its IME scheduling letters to the correct address, defendant demonstrated that copies of the IME scheduling letters had been mailed to the attorney who represented plaintiff’s assignor with respect to the accident in question (see Great Wall Acupuncture, P.C. v New York Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 22 Misc 3d 136[A], 2009 NY Slip Op 50294[U] [App Term, 2d, 11th & 13th Jud Dists 2009]). “
One Response
Terrible decision and Global Liberty Ins. Co. v New Century Acupuncture, P.C. 2018 NY Slip Op 03444 [161 AD3d 498]May 10, 2018 Appellate Division, First Department trumps it anyway. It doesnt add anything to Great Wall and in matter of fact is less than great wall bc it doesnt state any facts of the case which are obviously very importatnt. Just a stupid decision that goes against the regs. I have already won an arb decision after Accupuncture has been decided.