Legal Opinion
Bayside Rehab & Physical Therapy, P.C. v. GEICO Insurance
Civil Court of the City of New York
Decided April 3, 2009PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Katherine A. Levine, J.
This case presents the novel issue of whether an insurance company must notify prospective medical service providers that it will not reimburse them for any services they may provide to an assignor after a determination has been made, pursuant to an independent medical examination (IME) performed on the assignor, that further medical services are not medically necessary. As will be set forth below, since the notice requirements for verification requests, as contained in 11 NYCRR 65-3.5 and 65-3.6, do not apply to IMEs that are noticed and performed…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Zuckerman v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1980
- Forrest v. Jewish Guild for the BlindNew York Court of Appeals · 2004
- Stephen Fogel Psychological, P.C. v. Progressive Casualty InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006
- Presbyterian Hospital v. Maryland Casualty Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1997
- Mary Immaculate Hospital v. Allstate InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2004
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Westchester Medical Center v. Hereford InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- Westchester Medical Center v. Hereford InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012