§Why CasetextPricing

American Economy Insurance Company, et al., Respondents,v.State of New York, et al., Appellants.

Brief

12 Cited authorities

  1. Landgraf v. USI Film Prods.

    511 U.S. 244 (1994)   Cited 3,790 times   32 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a statute may apply retroactively when "clear congressional intent favor such a result"

  2. Eastern Enterprises v. Apfel

    524 U.S. 498 (1998)   Cited 556 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that levying Coal Act premiums on a pre-1978 signatory operator was an unconstitutional taking because the operator never agreed to provide lifetime benefits to its retirees

  3. Barenboim v. S, V. Starbucks Corp.

    2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 4754 (N.Y. 2013)   Cited 40 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the New York State Department of Labor's interpretation of the NYLL is entitled to deference

  4. Zechmann v. Canisteo Fire

    85 N.Y.2d 747 (N.Y. 1995)   Cited 30 times

    Argued April 25, 1995 Decided June 8, 1995 Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Third Judicial Department. Morris N. Lissauer, New York City, for appellant. Dennis C. Vacco, Attorney-General, New York City (Howard B. Friedland, Victoria A. Graffeo, Peter H. Schiff, Jane Lauer Barker and Theresa E. Wolinski of counsel), for Workers' Compensation Board, respondent. Chief Judge KAYE. The New York workers' compensation statute, like many across the country, provides for continuing

  5. Health Ins. Assn. v. Harnett

    44 N.Y.2d 302 (N.Y. 1978)   Cited 54 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Requiring all accident and health carriers to provide maternity coverage sustained on due process grounds

  6. U.S. Fidelity Guar. Co. v. McKeithen

    226 F.3d 412 (5th Cir. 2000)   Cited 16 times
    Discussing the types of takings claims

  7. Wetterau v. Canada Dry

    124 A.D.3d 1165 (N.Y. App. Div. 2015)   Cited 2 times

    01-29-2015 In the Matter of the Claim of James WETTERAU, Claimant, v. CANADA DRY et al., Respondents, and Special Fund for Reopened Cases, Appellant. Workers' Compensation Board, Respondent. Steven M. Licht, Special Funds Conservation Committee, Albany (Jill B. Singer of counsel), for appellant. Jones Jones, LLC, New York City (Sarah Thomas of counsel), for Canada Dry and another, respondents. ROSE, J. Steven M. Licht, Special Funds Conservation Committee, Albany (Jill B. Singer of counsel), for

  8. Jansch v. Sagamore Children's Fund

    302 A.D.2d 851 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)   Cited 7 times

    92736 Decided and Entered: February 27, 2003. Appeal from a decision of the Worker's Compensation Board, filed January 17, 2002, which, inter alia, ruled that the Special Fund Conservation Committee is liable for payment of claimant's compensation award. Grey Grey, Farmingdale (Robert E. Grey of counsel), for appellant. Before: Cardona, P.J., Mercure, Peters, Carpinello and, Lahtinen, JJ. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Peters, J. In October 1980, claimant sustained a work-related injury to his right eye and

  9. Matter Riley v. Aircraft Prods

    40 N.Y.2d 366 (N.Y. 1976)   Cited 22 times

    Argued June 4, 1976 Decided July 8, 1976 Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Third Judicial Department. William Taylor for appellants. John M. Cullen and George Cholet for Special Fund for Reopened Cases, respondent. Chief Judge BREITEL. In a workmen's compensation matter, the employer and its insurance carrier appeal. The Appellate Division had affirmed a decision of the Workmen's Compensation Board holding the carrier liable, in a proceeding in which the carrier had unsuccessfully

  10. Matter of Gantz v. Wallace Tiernan Lucidol

    41 A.D.2d 991 (N.Y. App. Div. 1973)   Cited 8 times

    May 24, 1973 Appeal by the Special Fund for Reopened Cases from a decision of the Workmen's Compensation Board, filed December 14, 1971, which imposed liability upon Special Fund under section 25-a Work. Comp. of the Workmen's Compensation Law. Claimant was injured in 1956 when his automobile was struck by a train. A compensation claim was filed and it was found that claimant had suffered a compensable accident arising out of and in the course of his employment. Compensation was paid during intermittent