Lead Practice Area: Insurance Fraud
Summary: Our client, Hartford Insurance Company, denied claims for medical services submitted by the plaintiff in connection with treatment rendered to its assignor. The medical provider sued to recover first party no-fault benefits in the Kings Civil Court. Hartford denied the plaintiff’s claims based upon the plaintiff’s assignor’s fraudulent procurement of the policy of insurance. In this case, it was Hartford's position that the plaintiff was not an innocent third party, and in line with precedent, that a health care provider deals with the assignor at its peril in accepting an assignment of the insured’s no-fault benefits.
We moved for summary judgment on this basis, and the court granted the motion. Traditionally, the issue of fraudulent procurement of a policy would raise issues of fact that would preclude summary judgment and force the parties to trial. It is often difficult to obtain an assignor’s attendance at trial, which would be necessary to prove Hartford’s case. The use of motions for summary judgment is extremely beneficial to insurance companies defending fraudulent no fault claims, as these cases are traditionally difficult and costly to prove at trial.