Legal Opinion
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Brooks
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided January 23, 1981PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Cardamone, J.
The only issue on this appeal is whether a no-fault insurer can reduce first-party benefits when a claimant’s employment is terminated for reasons other than the claimant’s disability. Such reduction is authorized in the regulations (11 NYCRR 65.6 [n] [2] [vi]) promulgated by the Superintendent of Insurance under article 18 of the Insur*457anee Law. In deciding a motion for summary judgment in favor of claimant (101 Misc 2d 704) Special Term determined that such a reduction in benefits was not contemplated by the Legislature when it enacted the New York…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Howard v. WymanNew York Court of Appeals · 1971
- Kurcsics v. Merchants Mutual InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1980
- Breen v. Cunard Lines Steamship Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1974
- State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Companies v. BrooksNew York Supreme Court · 1979
3Cited by17 opinions
- Allstate Insurance. v. LyonsDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 2012
- Palmer v. Allstate InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
- Werden v. Allstate Insurance Co.District Court, D. Colorado · 2009
- Meegan v. Progressive InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
- In re the Arbitration between Cady & Aetna Life & Casualty Co.New York Supreme Court · 1982
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.