| 525 EVM, Inc. v GEICO Gen. Ins. Co. |
| 2017 NY Slip Op 51144(U) [57 Misc 3d 127(A)] |
| Decided on September 8, 2017 |
| Appellate Term, Second 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| This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports. |
Fuld & Karp, P.C. (David Karp, Esq.), for appellant. The Law Office of Printz & Goldstein (Lawrence J. Chanice, Esq.), for respondent.
Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Reginald A. Boddie, J.), entered June 2, 2014. The order, insofar as appealed from and as limited by the brief, upon denying plaintiff's motion for summary judgment, failed to find, pursuant to CPLR 3212 (g), that plaintiff had established certain facts for all purposes in the action.
ORDERED that the order, insofar as appealed from, is affirmed, with $25 costs.
In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, plaintiff moved for summary judgment and defendant cross-moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. The Civil Court denied both motions, finding that there were triable issues of fact.
Plaintiff's sole argument on appeal is that the Civil Court, upon denying plaintiff's motion for summary judgment, should have found, pursuant to CPLR 3212 (g), that plaintiff had established certain facts for all purposes in the action. For the reasons stated in 525 EVM, Inc., as Assignee of Dzianis Haiduk v GEICO Gen. Ins. Co. (___ Misc 3d ___, 2017 NY Slip Op _____ [appeal No. 2014-1926 K C], decided herewith), the order, insofar as appealed from, is affirmed.
PESCE, P.J., ALIOTTA and SOLOMON, JJ., concur.