The Two Ships Peerless

Although not a no-fault matter, the decision in Egon J. Salmon, Inc. v Tamarin, 2006 NY Slip Op 26443 (Civ. Ct., Richmond Cty., 2006) may be of interest to NYC no-fault practitioners. In a show of jurisprudential fortitude that would surely overcome a lesser jurist, Hon. Philip S. Straniere has analyzed New York City Civil Court Act § 1815. It should be pointed out that there are actually two entirely different sections numbered 1815 in the NYCCCA. Lexis, for example, has a footnote pointing out this fact if you attempt to retrieve it. It should also be noted that this is the least of the absurdities involved with that section.

Long story short, Judge Straniere found the section unconstitutional.

And, in a no-fault-related matter, this is not the first time that Judge Straniere has held a section of the NYCCCA to be unconstitutional. See Richmond Pain Mgt. v State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 2004 NY Slip Op 50288(U) (Civ. Ct., Richmond Cty., 2004). Although causality is difficult to determine (just ask an engineer preparing a low-impact study for a no-fault case), Article 4 of the NYCCCA was eventually amended by the Legislature. Perhaps Judge Straniere's opinion in Egon J. Salmon, Inc. v Tamarin will remind the Legislature that § 1815 (one of them, anyway) is also ripe for amendment.