Harden v. Mass Transit Administration

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• reasoning that if the General Assembly had intended to include a state agency within the scope of an insurance statute, it would have made a specific provision to that effect
• holding that the Mass Transit Administration (MTA
• presuming the Legislature to have acted with respect to, full knowledge and information as to prior and existing law and legislation on the subject of the statute and the policy of the prior law
• presuming the Legislature to have acted with respect to, full knowledge and information as to prior and existing law and legislation on the subject of the statute and the policy of the prior law
• failure of General Assembly to pass bills explicitly excluding MTA from \no-fault\ statute concerning automobile insurance could simply mean that Legislature believed that it was already clear that MTA was not included
• “The General Assembly is presumed to have had, and acted with respect to, full knowledge and information as to prior and existing law and legislation on the subject of the statute and the policy of the prior law.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).