Legal Opinion
Perry v. AAMCO Transmissions
Rochester City Court
Decided November 29, 1984PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
John R. Schwartz, J.
This court is called upon to decide whether 22 NYCRR 28.12 (a), which governs the time to make a demand for a trial de nova pursuant to a plan of compulsory arbitration of civil cases in effect in this court since September, 1970, violates the “due process” clause of the United States and New York State Constitutions (US Const, 5th Arndt; NY Const, art I, § 6). The constitutional defect claimed is that 22 NYCRR 28.12 (a) does not provide for “service” and “notice of entry” of the arbitrator’s award before the 30 days in which to make a demand for a…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Ohio Ex Rel. Bryant v. Akron Metropolitan Park DistrictSupreme Court of the United States · 1930
- National Union of Marine Cooks & Stewards v. ArnoldSupreme Court of the United States · 1954
- In re MitchellNew York Court of Appeals · 1976
- Mildner v. GulottaDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1976
- Glass v. ThompsonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1976
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Standard Chartered Bank v. Ahmad Hamad Al Gosaibi & Bros.New York Supreme Court · 2012
- Brooklyn Caledonian Hospital v. CintronCivil Court of the City of New York · 1990