Fraudulent procurement defense precluded
May 28, 2015 No Comments
Gutierrez v United Servs. Auto. Assn., 2015 NY Slip Op 50797(U)(App. Term 2d Dept. 2015) “Plaintiff correctly argues that defendant failed to demonstrate that it is not
Gutierrez v United Servs. Auto. Assn., 2015 NY Slip Op 50797(U)(App. Term 2d Dept. 2015) “Plaintiff correctly argues that defendant failed to demonstrate that it is not
Okslen Acupuncture P.C. v Unitrin Advantage Ins. Co., 2014 NY Slip Op 51290(U)(App. Term 1st Dept. 2014) “The defendant-insurer failed to demonstrate entitlement to depositions relating to
Optimal Well-Being Chiropractic, P.C. v Utica Mut. Ins. Co., 2014 NY Slip Op 51233(U)(App. Term 2d Dept, 2014) “While defendant sought summary judgment on the grounds that
Doctrinally, a fraudulent procurement defense should not be bound by the 30-day pay or deny rule. This is so since the Appellate Division in Kaplun specifically
Jian Kang, Inc. v New York Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 2013 NY Slip Op 50851(U)(App. Term 2d Dept. 2013) (1) In this action by a provider
United States v. Leslie Dantes Theodore (11 CR 829)(SDNY 2013) MR. BELL: Your Honor, not for the purposes of the allocution. I will note that
I have here a repository of some of the documents that I either ordered or found on Pacer regarding the following individuals: 1) Defendant Mugerman (Unlimited
Lincoln Gen. Ins. Co. v Alev Med. Supply, Inc., 2011 NY Slip Op 21012 )(App. Term 2d Dept. 2011) In a case with major implications, the
Quality Psychological Servs., P.C. v GEICO Ins. Co., 2010 NY Slip Op 51423(U)(Civ Kings. 2010) Here are the five statements from this case that are important.
Campbell v Thomas, 2010 NY Slip Op 02082 (2d Dept.2010)(Prudenti, P.J.) For those of you who have been involved with elder abuse in some fashion, this
