Search for: "LMK Psychological Servs., P.C. v State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co."
Results 1 - 15
of 15
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 Jul 2008, 4:51 pm
Hat tip to Dave Gottlieb over at No-Fault Paradise for reporting that the New York Court of Appeals today granted leave to State Farm to appeal the Third Department's decision in LMK Psychological Servs., P.C. v. [read post]
4 Jun 2008, 2:53 pm
Follow the interest-ing and continuing debate on the Third Department's December 2007 decision in LMK Psychological Servs., P.C. v State Farm Mut. [read post]
1 Jul 2008, 6:59 am
This morning, the Court of Appeals has granted State Farm leave to appeal the decision of the Appellate Division, Third Department in LMK Psychological Servs., P.C. v State Farm Mut. [read post]
12 Feb 2009, 11:33 am
State Farm Mut. [read post]
11 Aug 2008, 9:42 am
Of course, the Fortune Medical decision is based on the Third Department's decision inLMK Psychological Servs., P.C. v State Farm Mut. [read post]
2 Apr 2009, 7:46 am
State Farm Mut. [read post]
12 Jun 2008, 8:04 am
State Farm Mut. [read post]
10 Apr 2009, 7:55 am
State Farm Mut. [read post]
7 Dec 2009, 5:52 am
State Farm Mut. [read post]
6 Dec 2010, 2:06 pm
Co., supra; LMK Psychological Serv., P.C. v. [read post]
30 Jun 2008, 8:45 pm
Ct., Nassau Co., decided 6/16/2008)Although the Third Department's December 2007 decision in LMK Psychological Servs., P.C. v. [read post]
20 Feb 2009, 3:43 am
Thus, the Appellate Term properly reversed the order of the Civil Court and remitted the matter for the new interest calculation.Medical providers likely will continue to argue that this ruling is at odds with the Third Department's holding in LMK Psychological Servs., P.C. v State Farm Mut. [read post]
11 Feb 2009, 6:48 am
I was not able to make the trip down the Thruway to Albany today to observe this afternoon's oral arguments in LMK Psychological Servs., P.C. v State Farm Mut. [read post]
2 Jan 2008, 5:35 am
Just recently, the Appellate Division, Third Department in LMK Psychological Servs. v. [read post]
27 Oct 2015, 6:01 am
The Superintendent's interpretation is entitled to deference, since it is neither irrational nor unreasonable, nor counter to the clear wording of a statutory provision (see LMK Psychological Servs., P.C. v State Farm Mut. [read post]
