Legal Opinion
In Re the Arbitration Between New York City Transit Authority & Thom
New York Court of Appeals
Decided February 26, 1981PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.
We agree with the court below that the New York City-Transit Authority does not qualify as a political subdivision of the State for purposes of the exception found in subdivision 1 of section 370 of the Vehicle and Traffic Law for “motor vehicles * * * owned and operated by a municipality”. In regard to the Transit Authority’s remaining contention, we have held that section 370 of the Vehicle and Traffic Law does not exclude self-insurers from the requirements of providing uninsured motorist…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Allstate Insurance v. ShawNew York Court of Appeals · 1980
3Cited by13 opinions
- State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. AmatoNew York Court of Appeals · 1988
- Spring Valley Gardens Associates v. MarreroAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
- Manhattan & Bronx Surface Transit Operating Authority v. EvansAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1983
- In re the Arbitration between Country-Wide Insurance & ManningAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1983
- In re the Arbitration between Manhattan & Bronx Surface Transit Operating Authority & EvansNew York Supreme Court · 1983
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.