Legal Opinion
Countrywide Insurance v. DHD Medical, P.C.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided July 7, 2011PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Petitioner argues that respondent is a fraudulently incorporated medical services provider and therefore is not only ineligible for reimbursement of no-fault payments (see State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v Mallela, 4 NY3d 313 [2005]) but is also precluded from demanding arbitration pursuant to Insurance Law § 5106 (b) (and the no-fault policy issued by petitioner). Contrary to this argument, the defense of fraudulent incorporation is “for the arbitrator and not for the courts” (see Matter of Nassau Ins. Co. v McMorris, 41 NY2d 701, 701 [1977]; Matter of MVAIC v Interboro Med. Care & Diagnostic…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. MallelaNew York Court of Appeals · 2005
- MVAIC v. Interboro Medical Care & Diagnostic PCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010
3Cited by3 opinions
- Liberty Mutual Insurance v. Excel Imaging, P.C.District Court, E.D. New York · 2012
- Liberty Mutual Insurance v. Raia Medical Health, P.C.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2016
- ENS Med., P.C. v. Nationwide Ins. Co.New York Supreme Court, Kings County · 2026