Aetna Health Plans v. Hanover Insurance Company
New York Court of Appeals
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
- North Star Reinsurance Corp. v. Continental InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1993
- Ocean Accident & Guarantee Corp. v. Hooker Electrochemical Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1925
- Teichman v. Community Hospital of Western SuffolkNew York Court of Appeals · 1996
- Gerseta Corporation v. Equitable Trust Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1926
- Boyle v. KelleyNew York Court of Appeals · 1977
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.