In Metropolitan Diagnostic Med. Care, P.C. v. Erie Ins. Co. of N.Y., 54 Misc.3d 129(A) (App. Term, 2d, 11th & 13th Jud. Dists 2016), the MRIs that were the subject of the suit were prescribed by a physician who specialized in physical medicine and rehabilitation (PMR). The defendant insurer denied the claim based on a peer review report issued by a physician specializing in orthopedic surgery. At trial, defendant’s peer review expert testified to the lack of medical necessity of the MRIs. The trial court ruled for the plaintiff, holding that as the peer review physician practiced in a different specialty than the prescribing physician, he was not competent to testify. The trial court further held that nevertheless, defendant’s expert witness testimony was not credible.
On appeal, the Appellate Term held:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
