Legal Opinion
Garofalo v. Empire Blue Cross and Blue Shield
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided September 28, 1999No. 98 Civ. 3506(JSR)PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
RAKOFF, District Judge.
The thinly-disguised premise of this lawsuit is that a New York health insurer should be penalized for adhering to the peculiarities of New York State health insurance law. That such a premise is contrary to common sense is obvious. To show that it is also contrary to applicable legal principles requires a bit more discussion.
On May 15, 1998, plaintiffs Laurie Garo-falo and Hilary Rosser commenced this action against their health insurer, defendant Empire Blue Cross and Blue Shield (“Empire”), seeking under sections 502(a)(1)(B) and (a)(3) of the…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Valley Forge Christian College v. Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Varity Corp. v. HoweSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Gladstone, Realtors v. Village of BellwoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Metropolitan Life Insurance v. MassachusettsSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Beth Israel Medical Center v. Horizon Blue Cross & Blue Shield of New Jersey, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2006
- Beth Israel Medical Center v. Horizon Blue Cross And Blue Shield Of New Jersey, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2006
- Plut v. Fireman's Fund InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2000
- Custom Rubber Corp. v. ATS Specialized, Inc.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 2009
- Paloian v. LaSalle Bank National Ass'n (In re Doctors Hospital of Hyde Park, Inc.)United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · 2013
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.