Bernard B. v. Blue Cross And Blue Shield Of Greater New York
Bernard B. And Shirley B., Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v. Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Greater New York Albert Lewis, Individually and as Superintendent of the New York Insurance Department New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation
Opinion
679 F.2d 7
BERNARD B. and Shirley B., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Appellants, v. BLUE CROSS AND BLUE SHIELD OF GREATER NEW YORK; Albert Lewis, individually and as Superintendent of the New York Insurance Department; New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation, Appellees.
No. 908, Docket 81-7791.
United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
Argued March 24, 1982. Decided May 18, 1982.
Minna J. Kotkin, New York Lawyers for the Public Interest, Inc., New York City, for appellants.
Robert A. Bicks, Breed, Abbott & Morgan, New York City (Victoria A. Cundiff, Rosemary A. Moukad and John L. Shurtleff, Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Greater New York, New York City, of counsel), for appellee Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Greater New York.
June A. Witterschein, New York City (Frederick A. O. Schwartz, Jr., Corp. Counsel, Stephen J. McGrath, New York City, of counsel), for appellee New York City Health and Hospitals Corp.
Donald Sticklor, Asst. Atty. Gen., New York City (Robert Abrams, Atty. Gen. of the State of New York, George D. Zuckerman, Asst. Sol. Gen., New York City, of counsel), for appellee Lewis.
Before LUMBARD and OAKES, Circuit Judges, and FRIEDMAN, Chief Judge, United States Court of Claims. *
PER CURIAM:
1
The judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District Court of New York is affirmed on the opinion of Judge Sand below, 528 F.Supp. 125 (S.D.N.Y.1981).
* Sitting by designation
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 2 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.