Baker v. Temporary Construction Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Baker v. Temporary Construction Co.

73 A.D.2d 659, 423 N.Y.S.2d 840

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedDecember 24, 1979

StatusPublished

This text of 73 A.D.2d 659 (Baker v. Temporary Construction Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Baker v. Temporary Construction Co., 73 A.D.2d 659, 423 N.Y.S.2d 840 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1979).

Pincite

Opinion

— In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated July 25, 1979, which (1) granted plaintiffs motion to strike defendant’s first affirmative defense and (2) denied defendant’s cross motion for summary judgment based on that same defense. Order modified by deleting therefrom the second decretal paragraph thereof and substituting therefor a provision denying the motion to strike defendant’s first affirmative defense. As so modified, order affirmed, without costs or disbursements. The claim that the plaintiffs exclusive remedy is under the Workers’ Compensation Law is an appropriate affirmative defense to the complaint as drawn. O’Connor, J. P., Mangano, Rabin and Gibbons, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

— In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated July 25, 1979, which (1) granted plaintiffs motion to strike defendant’s first affirmative defense and (2) denied defendant’s cross motion for summary judgment based on that same defense. Order modified by deleting therefrom the second decretal paragraph thereof and substituting therefor a provision denying the motion to strike defendant’s first affirmative defense. As so modified, order affirmed, without costs or disbursements. The claim that the plaintiffs exclusive remedy is under the Workers’ Compensation Law is an appropriate affirmative defense to the complaint as drawn. O’Connor, J. P., Mangano, Rabin and Gibbons, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

73 A.D.2d 659, 423 N.Y.S.2d 840, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/baker-v-temporary-construction-co-nyappdiv-1979.