M.N. Dental Diagnostics, P.C. v. New York City Transit Authority
This text of 82 A.D.3d 409 (M.N. Dental Diagnostics, P.C. v. New York City Transit Authority) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
[410]*410It is well settled that “the No-Fault Law does not codify common-law principles; it creates new and independent statutory rights and obligations in order to provide a more efficient means for adjusting financial responsibilities arising out of automobile accidents” (Aetna Life & Cas. Co. v Nelson, 67 NY2d 169, 175 [1986]). Since it is undisputed that there existed no contract between plaintiff’s assignor and the New York City Transit Authority, the common carrier’s obligation to provide no-fault benefits arises out of the no-fault statute. Therefore, the three-year statute of limitations as set forth in CPLR 214 (2) is applicable here. Concur — Gonzalez, P.J., Tom, Andrias, Renwick and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
82 A.D.3d 409, 917 N.Y.2d 856, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mn-dental-diagnostics-pc-v-new-york-city-transit-authority-nyappdiv-2011.