Opinion

Falzon v. Brown

  • 282 A.D.2d 498
  • 723 N.Y.S.2d 859
  • 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3541
Court
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Filed
Apr 9, 2001
Status
Published
Cited by
1 cases
Authority
More cited than 47.0%

The opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from so much of an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Molia, J.), dated July 14, 2000, as granted the defendant’s application made at the close of evidence for judgment as a matter of law and, in effect, dismissed the complaint on the ground that the plaintiffs exclusive remedy was under the Workers’ Compensation Law.

*499 Ordered that the order and judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly granted the defendant’s application for judgment as a matter of law. The defendant, who owned the premises where the plaintiff was injured was also president of the corporation that employed the plaintiff. Accordingly, the Workers Compensation Law is the plaintiff’s exclusive remedy (see, Lovario v Vuotto, 266 AD2d 191, 192 ; Zimmerman v Optica Mfg. Corp., 268 AD2d 584 ; Vanerstrom v Strasser, 240 AD2d 563 ; Lawler v Donnelly, 237 AD2d 413 ). Santucci, J. P., S. Miller, Friedmann and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.