Skip to main content

National Union Fire Insurance v. Erazo

N.Y. Civ. Ct.January 19, 2001Cited 1 time
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s)
Feinman
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
motion to dismiss

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

Wage Theft

Outcome

Court denied defendant's motion to dismiss on statute of limitations grounds, holding that an insurance company can qualify as a 'crime victim' under CPLR 213-b and therefore the seven-year statute of limitations applies rather than the three-year period. However, the court held the motion in abeyance pending further submissions regarding when the cause of action accrued.

What This Ruling Means

I apologize, but I cannot provide a meaningful summary of the National Union Fire Insurance v. Erazo case based on the information provided. The case details are extremely limited - there's no description of what actually happened, what the court decided, or what specific employment law issues were involved. Without knowing the facts of the dispute, the court's reasoning, or the outcome, it would be inappropriate and potentially misleading for me to speculate about what this case means for workers. Employment law cases can involve many different issues - from wrongful termination and discrimination to wage disputes and workplace safety - and each has different implications. To properly explain how a court ruling affects workers, I need access to the actual court decision, which would include: - The specific facts of what happened between the parties - The legal claims that were made - The court's analysis and reasoning - The final ruling or judgment If you have access to the full court decision or more detailed information about this case, I'd be happy to provide a clear, plain-English summary of its significance for workers.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse more:Wage Theft cases

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.