STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY v. Grand Medical Supply Corp. et al., Defendants–Appellants. (2024)

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (David B. Cohen, J.), entered on or about April 14, 2023, which granted plaintiff insurer's motion for summary judgment on its causes of action for declaratory judgment, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Plaintiff established its prima facie entitlement to summary judgment on its first cause of action for declaratory relief by submitting evidence that claimants failed to appear at properly scheduled examinations under oath (EUOs), thus vitiating the insurance policy (see PV Holding Corp. v. Hank Ross Med., P.C., 188 A.D.3d 429, 430, 135 N.Y.S.3d 376 [1st Dept. 2020]).  A claim specialist submitted an affidavit of merit and affidavits of service for the EUO notices sent to the claimants’ residences directing them to appear for two separate EUOs. In addition, plaintiff submitted an attorney's affirmation, based on the attorney's personal knowledge, averring that the claimants failed to appear for their scheduled EUOs and attaching deposition transcripts memorializing the claimants’ nonappearance at the EUOs. Because the record demonstrates that plaintiff mailed its notices to take the claimants’ EUOs before it received defendants’ no-fault verification forms, plaintiff did not have to comply with the 15–day time frame for sending EUO notices set forth in 11 NYCRR 65–3.5 (see State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Surgicore of Jersey City LLC, 195 A.D.3d 454, 455, 149 N.Y.S.3d 68 [1st Dept. 2021];  Mapfre Ins. Co. of N.Y. v. Manoo, 140 A.D.3d 468, 469, 33 N.Y.S.3d 54 [1st Dept. 2016]).

In opposition, defendants failed to raise a triable issue of fact.  Defendants offer nothing more than speculation to support their argument that they need further discovery, nor does the record support the argument.  Defendants have also not submitted an affidavit to establish that essential facts may exist but cannot yet be stated (CPLR 3212[f];  354 Chauncey Realty, LLC v. Brownstone Agency, Inc., 213 A.D.3d 544, 545, 184 N.Y.S.3d 745 [1st Dept. 2023]).

Because the policy is vitiated, State Farm did not have to establish that it timely denied defendants’ claims (see PV Holding Corp., 188 A.D.3d at 430, 135 N.Y.S.3d 376).

We have considered defendants’ remaining arguments and find them unavailing.