Maidstone Ins. v. Medical Records Retrieval

No Basis Found to Vacate Master Arbitration Award; Unopposed Petition Denied

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

The following papers numbered 1 to 2 Read on this motion, VACATE ARBITRATION AWARD Noticed on September 14, 2017 and duly submitted on the Motion Calendar of September 14, 2017:PAPERS NUMBEREDNotice of Motion — Exhibits and Affidavits Annexed 1,2

*1 Upon the foregoing papers, the petitioner Maidstone Insurance Company (“Petitioner”) seeks an order (1) pursuant to CPLR 7511, vacating the award of the master arbitrator that affirmed an award of the lower arbitrator finding that the respondent Medical Records Retrieval Inc., d/b/a Kamara Medical Supplies, a/a/o Sandra Pereira (“Respondent”) was entitled to compensation for services performed (a) from March 12, 2016 through April 22, 2016, in the sum of $3,750.00; (b) from March 12, 2016 until April 1, 2016, in the sum of $1,323.00; and (c) from March 12, 2016 in the sum of $19.50 and $34.22, and entering judgment in favor of Petitioner vacating the award, and remanding the matter to a different arbitrator to compute the amount due and owing under the Medicaid fee schedule, which would be 1/6 times the wholesale price of the CPM and CTU, divided by 30, times the amount of days the items were rented, or $1031.27; (2) such other and further relief as this Court may deem just, proper, and equitable, and (3) costs and disbursements as taxed by the clerk, including Petitioner’s $325 master arbitration fee. The petition is unopposed. In cases of compulsory arbitration, judicial review of a master arbitrator’s award is restricted to the grounds set forth in Article 75 of the CPLR (see Matter of Petrofsky, 54 N.Y.2d 207, 210-11 [1981]). The “governing consideration is ‘whether the decision was rational or had a plausible basis’” (Curley v. State Farm Ins. Co., 269 A.D.2d 240, 242 [1st Dept. 2000], citing Petrofsky at 211). “Vacatur of an arbitrator’s award is statutorily limited to occasions involving fraud, corruption or bias…or occasions where the arbitrator exceeded his or her power, or so imperfectly executed it so that a final and definite award was not

Maidstone Ins. v. Medical Records Retrieval

No Basis Found to Vacate Master Arbitration Award; Unopposed Petition Denied

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to New York Law Journal