A trial court has ruled for the second time that a change in state law to decrease the state’s contribution to judges’ health care insurance premiums was unconstitutional.
Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Carol Edmead‘s March 25 ruling Bransten v. State of New York, 159160/12, granted a motion for summary judgment filed by 13 active and retired Supreme Court justices, two associations representing judges and more than 1,000 retired judges who are not individually identified in court papers.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
