In Home Care Ortho. Med. Supply, Inc. v. American Mfrs. Mut. Ins. Co., 14 Misc 3d 139[A], 836 N.Y.S.2d 499, 2007 NY Slip Op 50302[U], an action to recover assigned, first party no-fault benefits, plaintiff moved to preclude defendant's expert's testimony on the ground that the expert did not personally undertake the peer review underlying defendant's denial of the two claims at issue. The court held "This was error, since the expert would be subject to full cross-examination and his testimony as to lack of medical necessity would be limited to the basis for denial set forth in the original peer review report" (see generally General Acc. Ins. Group v. Cirucci, 46 NY2d 862, 864, 387 N.E.2d 223, 414 N.Y.S.2d 512; Home Care Ortho. Med. Supply, Inc. v. American Mfrs. Mut. Ins. Co. 14 Misc 3d 139[A], 836 N.Y.S.2d 499, 2007 NY Slip Op 50302[U]).