In a prior wrap-up1 we discussed Davydov v Progressive Ins. Co.,2 a case where the assignment of benefits was written in favor of “Dr. Davydov,” but the lawsuit was initiated on behalf of “Dr. Davydov, P.C.” In that case, the Appellate Term permitted the plaintiff to recover as the defendant insurer did not request verification as to the assignment, nor did it issue a denial on the basis that the assignment was defective.
In Bedford Park Neurology, P.C. v. New York Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co.3—rendered less than six months after Davydov and having similar facts—the Appellate Term came to the opposite result. In Bedford, the physician was listed as the provider on the bill, but handwritten next to the physician’s name on the bill was “Bedford Park” and not “Bedford Park Neurology, P.C.,” the plaintiff that brought the action. The assignment of benefits, however, was written in favor of the plaintiff. In dismissing plaintiff’s complaint, the Appellate Term held, “Plaintiff failed to submit a claim form which entitled it to payment, and may not correct the allegedly erroneous claim form once litigation has commenced,”4 citing Davydov.
This content has been archived.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]
