Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Aetna Health Plans v. Hanover Insurance Company

New York Court of Appeals

Decided June 14, 2016No. 97Published

1ConcurrenceStein, J.

I am in complete agreement with the majority’s analysis regarding plaintiff Aetna Health Plans’ inability to recover under the No-Fault Law and related regulations. However, I write separately to address the dissent’s analysis of Aetna’s equitable subrogation claim. In my view, Supreme Court properly dismissed the complaint because Aet-na’s claims are inconsistent with, and would improperly supplant, the tightly-regulated and comprehensive no-fault statutory scheme crafted by the legislature, and because the principles of equitable subrogation do not apply under the circumstances presented…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. North Star Reinsurance Corp. v. Continental InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1993
  2. Ocean Accident & Guarantee Corp. v. Hooker Electrochemical Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1925
  3. Teichman v. Community Hospital of Western SuffolkNew York Court of Appeals · 1996
  4. Gerseta Corporation v. Equitable Trust Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1926
  5. Boyle v. KelleyNew York Court of Appeals · 1977

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API