Legal Opinion

Commissioners of State Insurance Fund v. Blank

New York Supreme Court

Decided January 21, 1954PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMatthew M. Levy, J.

This action is brought to recover premiums alleged to be due on a policy of insurance issued pursuant to the Workmen’s Compensation Law. The plaintiffs move to strike out the three affirmative defenses contained in the answer.

The first defense claims misnomer of parties plaintiffs. Section 93 of the Workmen’s Compensation Law provides that actions may be brought “ in the name of the commissioners of the state insurance fund ”, and in the present suit the plaintiffs are so named. The defendant contends that the statute thus worded means that the action must be titled in the personal names of…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Stephen Peabody, Jr., & Co. v. Travelers InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1925
  2. Andrews v. GoodmanCity of New York Municipal Court · 1936

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Commissioners of the State Insurance Fund v. Mascali-Robke Co.New York Supreme Court · 1955
  2. Commissioners of State Insurance Fund v. AlexanderNew York Supreme Court · 1956
  3. Commissioners of the State Insurance Fund v. RegenstreifAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1960

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

Powered by the Exa API