Legal Opinion

DaimlerChrysler Corp. v. Spitzer

New York Supreme Court

Decided September 14, 2004PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Joseph R. Cannizzaro, J.

Introduction:

This CPLR article 78 proceeding concerns General Business Law § 198-a, known as the “New Car Lemon Law.” Petitioners, which are manufacturers of new motor vehicles sold in New York State, commenced this proceeding to enjoin respondents from using materials, including award forms promulgated for New Car Lemon Law arbitrations, which proscribe an allegedly incorrect legal standard. Respondent Eliot Spitzer, the Attorney General of New York State, who is responsible for the supervision and operation of the statewide New Car Lemon Law…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Majewski v. Broadalbin-Perth Central School DistrictNew York Court of Appeals · 1998
  2. Kurcsics v. Merchants Mutual InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1980
  3. Reilly v. ReidNew York Court of Appeals · 1978
  4. Toys" R" US v. SilvaNew York Court of Appeals · 1996
  5. Raritan Development Corp. v. SilvaNew York Court of Appeals · 1997

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. DaimlerChrysler Corp. v. SpitzerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005
  2. People ex rel. Johnson v. Superintendent, Fishkill Correctional FacilityNew York Supreme Court · 2015
  3. General Motors Corp. v. WarnerNew York Supreme Court · 2004
  4. McMorris v. Michael W.New York Supreme Court, Dutchess County · 2024
  5. McMorris v. Michael W.New York Supreme Court, Dutchess County · 2024

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

Powered by the Exa API