Zuckerberg v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield
Cases that cite this one
11 later published cases cite this decision.
- Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Wrights Mill Holdings, LLC (District Court, S.D. New York 2015)
- Richard H. Heasley, Sr. And Doris G. Heasley v. Belden & Blake Corporation (3d Cir. 1993)
- DeCicco v. Syosset Central School District (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2006)
- A.B. Medical Services, PLLC v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance (Civil Court of the City of New York 2005)
- CityWide Social Work & Psychological Services, P.L.L.C. v. Travelers Indemnity Co. (Civil Court of the City of New York 2004)
- Schonfeld v. Aetna Life Insurance & Annuity Co. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1993)
- Washburn v. Wholehealth Insurance Network, Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1993)
- Tele-Pac, Inc. v. Grainger (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1991)
- Nalezenec v. Blue Cross of Western New York (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1991)
- Tudor v. Metropolitan Life Insurance (Nassau County District Court 1989)
- Wachtel v. Metropolitan Life Insurance (Nassau County District Court 1988)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.
We agree that plaintiff failed to sustain her burden of proving that Hospital La Gloria provided "medical and surgical or obstetrical care” as contemplated by the definition of "hospital” contained in the Blue Cross community rated contract. Because the contract definition of "hospital” is clear and unambiguous, there is no basis here for application of the "substantial compliance” doctrine.
Thus, it is unnecessary to reach any of the other issues raised by plaintiff.
Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Meyer, Simons, Kaye, Alexander and Titone concur; Judge Hancock, Jr., taking no part.
Order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.