Legal Opinion
Introna v. Allstate Insurance
District Court, E.D. New York
Decided December 27, 1993No. 93-CV-2870 (JRB)PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORAND UM-DECISION AND ORDER
BARTELS, District Judge.
The plaintiffs and the defendant Allstate Insurance Company (“Allstate”) cross-move under Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for summary judgment. Allstate’s motion seeks dismissal of 29 causes of action, all of which seek reimbursement for medical services provided by plaintiff Mario Introna, D.C. (“Dr. Introna”), a licensed chiropractor, to patients covered by New York State’s Comprehensive Motor Vehicle Insurance Reparations Act, Insurance Law §§ 5101, et seq., and the regulations promulgated thereunder (collectively the…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Heublein, Inc. And Subsidiaries v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1993
- Coach Leatherware Co. v. Anntaylor, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1991
- Trans-Orient Marine Corporation v. Star Trading & Marine, Inc., and the Republic of the SudanCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1991
- Rose Schwabenbauer v. Board Of Education Of The City School District Of The City Of OleanCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1981
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- ABC Medical Management, Inc. v. GEICO General InsuranceCivil Court of the City of New York · 2003
- Introna v. Allstate InsuranceDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1995