Normile v. Allstate Insurance

462 N.E.2d 1201, 61 N.Y.2d 902, 474 N.Y.S.2d 483, 1984 N.Y. LEXIS 4151
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Normile v. Allstate Insurance. Read the opinion of the Court — 60 N.Y.2d 1003
New York Court of Appeals·Decided February 28, 1984·Published

Opinion

Motion to amend the remittitur granted. Return of the remittitur requested and, when returned, it will be amended by adding thereto the following: Upon the appeal herein there were presented and necessarily passed upon questions under the Constitution of the United States, viz: Whether the rights of plaintiff-appellant under the Fourteenth Amendment were denied. Plaintiff-appellant argued that he was denied due process of law and equal protection of the law by the limitation on his right to recovery pursuant to section 671 of the New York State Insurance Law. The Court of Appeals considered plaintiff-appellant’s contentions and held that there were no violations of his constitutional rights. [See 60 NY2d 1003.]

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Normile v. Allstate Insurance, 462 N.E.2d 1201, 61 N.Y.2d 902, 474 N.Y.S.2d 483, 1984 N.Y. LEXIS 4151 (N.Y. 1984).

462 N.E.2d 1201 (Normile v. Allstate Insurance) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Normile v. Allstate Insurance
459 N.E.2d 843 (New York Court of Appeals, 1983)