Legal Opinion
Okslen Acupuncture P.C. v. Dinallo
New York Supreme Court
Decided June 26, 2009PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Lewis Bart Stone, J.
Petitioners Okslen Acupuncture PC. and Nicolo Genovese commenced this proceeding by notice of petition, dated December 10, 2008, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules article 78, against respondents Eric R. Dinallo, as Superintendent of Insurance of the State of New York (the Superintendent), National Insurance Crime Bureau (NICE), and State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, AutoOne Insurance *639Company, and General Assurance Company (the carriers), seeking to order respondents to take certain actions as specified in the petition.
Petitioners ask…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Levandusky v. One Fifth Avenue Apartment Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1990
- New York Civil Liberties Union v. StateNew York Court of Appeals · 2005
- Community Action Against Lead Poisoning v. LyonsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1974
- Perazzo v. LindsayAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1968
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Okslen Acupuncture P.C. v. DinalloAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010
- Great Lakes Reinsurance (U.K.) PLC v. BranamDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2013
- Sprentall v. Beacon Health Options, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2021