Legal Opinion · Dissent

Marques v. Harvard Pilgrim Healthcare of New England, Inc.

Supreme Court of Rhode Island

Decided September 1, 2005No. 2002-103-AppealPublished

1DissentRobinson, J.

I respectfully disagree with the majority’s understanding of certain of the pertinent statutes, and therefore I must dissent. In my judgment, the express provisions of the McCarran-Ferguson Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1011 et seq., render the ADA inapplicable to this case.

My analysis is guided in large measure by what I consider to be the powerful logic and the unflinching approach to statutory construction that is reflected in the decision of the Seventh Circuit in the case of Doe v. Mutual of Omaha Insurance Co., 179 F.3d 557 (7th Cir.1999) (Posner, J.). While I have carefully considered the decisions…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Metropolitan Life Insurance v. MassachusettsSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  2. Securities & Exchange Commission v. National Securities, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1969
  3. Group Life & Health Insurance v. Royal Drug Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1979
  4. PGA Tour, Inc. v. MartinSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
  5. Union Labor Life Insurance v. PirenoSupreme Court of the United States · 1982

17 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