[*1]
P.L.P. Acupuncture, P.C. v Travelers Indem. Co.
2008 NY Slip Op 50484(U) [19 Misc 3d 126(A)]
Decided on March 14, 2008
Appellate Term, First Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.


Decided on March 14, 2008
APPELLATE TERM OF THE SUPREME COURT, FIRST DEPARTMENT

PRESENT: DAVIS, J.P., SCHOENFELD, HEITLER, JJ
.

P.L.P. Acupuncture, P.C. a/a/o Mercedes Marinez, Mersedes Marinez,Plaintiff-Respondent, No.570686/07

against

Travelers Indemnity Co. & Travelers Property Casualty Co. all d/b/a the Travelers, Defendants-Appellants.


Defendants appeal from a judgment of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Bronx County (Larry S. Schachner, J.), dated February 22, 2006, after a nonjury trial, in favor of plaintiff in the principal sum of $4,795.98.


Per Curiam.

Judgment (Larry S. Schachner, J.), dated February 22, 2006, affirmed, with $25 costs.

Having admitted receipt of plaintiff's claims for no-fault first party benefits, defendants may not now be heard to argue that plaintiff failed to establish that the claims had been mailed and received (see Fair Price Med. Supply, Inc. v St. Paul Travelers Ins. Co., 16 Misc 3d 8 [2007]; Devonshire Surgical Facility v GEICO, 16 Misc 3d 130[A], 2007 NY Slip Op 51308[U] [2007]). Defendants waived any objections based on lack of proof of a valid assignment since they did not seek verification of the assignment (see Hospital for Joint Diseases v Travelers Prop. Cas. Ins. Co., 9 NY3d 312 [2007]). Nor may defendants now assert a defense of excessive fees, inasmuch as they failed to establish the issuance of timely denials of the claims (see Westchester Med. Ctr. v American Tr. Ins. Co., 17 AD3d 581 [[2005]; New York Hosp. Med. Ctr. of Queens v Country-wide Ins. Co., 295 AD2d 583 [2002]) or that such a defense was the stated basis for the denial of no-fault benefits (see Todaro v Geico Gen. Ins. Co., 46 AD3d 1086 [2007]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.
Decision Date: March 14, 2008