Legal Opinion

Schulman v. Group Health Inc.

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Decided March 28, 2006PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

2Per curiam

Judgment, entered on or about September 7, 2004, affirmed, without costs.

Defendant insurer’s primary contention on appeal, i.e., that this small claims action for reimbursement of medical expenses is precluded by Insurance Law § 4914 (b) (4) (A) (iv) is without merit. That same argument was raised and expressly rejected by the Appellate Division, Fourth Department, in Nenno v Blue Cross & Blue Shield of W.N.Y. (303 AD2d 930, 932 [2003], rearg denied 306 AD2d 960 [2003]), a decision binding on this court (see Mountain View Coach Lines v Storms, 102 AD2d 663 [1984]).…

3Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Mountain View Coach Lines, Inc. v. StormsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
  2. Neuwirth v. Blue Cross & Blue ShieldNew York Court of Appeals · 1984
  3. Simons v. Blue Cross & Blue ShieldAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
  4. Nenno v. Blue Cross & Blue ShieldAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003
  5. Vellios v. IPRONew York Supreme Court · 2003

4Cited by1 opinion

  1. Mercy Flight Central, Inc. v. KondolfCanandaigua City Court · 2013

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API