Legal Opinion
Flax v. O'Dea
New York Supreme Court
Decided November 1, 1965PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBernard S. Meyer, J.
Effective April 13, 1962, subdivision 5 of section 221 of the Insurance Law was amended to provide that “Notwithstanding any provision of a policy or contract of * * * group accident and health insurance, whenever such policy or contract provides for reimbursement for any optometric service which is within the lawful scope of practice of a duly licensed optometrist, a subscriber * * * shall be entitled to reimbursement for such service, whether the said service is performed by a physician or duly licensed optometrist ”. Beginning in July, 1963, plaintiff, a duly licensed optometrist, rendered…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Addiss v. SeligNew York Court of Appeals · 1934
- Gram v. Mutual Life InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1950
- Baumann v. . Preferred Accident Ins. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1919
- Mulligan v. Travelers Insurance Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1952
- Mulligan v. Travelers Ins. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1954
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Gladstone v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceCivil Court of the City of New York · 1971
- Baum v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceCivil Court of the City of New York · 1972