Blankoff v. Vitucci

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Blankoff v. Vitucci

68 A.D.2d 876, 414 N.Y.S.2d 42, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11105

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

DecidedMarch 5, 1979

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 68 A.D.2d 876 (Blankoff v. Vitucci) 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

Blankoff v. Vitucci, 68 A.D.2d 876, 414 N.Y.S.2d 42, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11105 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1979).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by Travelers Insurance Company, a workers’ compensation carrier, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated February 15, 1978, as granted the plaintiffs motion to vacate its lien on the settlement proceeds of the action between plaintiff and defendants. Order reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, without costs or disbursements, and plaintiff’s motion is denied. Special Term held that a workers’ compensation carrier, which has made payments for compensation and medical expenses to a claimant injured during the course of his employment, may not assert a lien pursuant to subdivision 1 of section 29 of the Workers’ Compensation Law against the proceeds of a judgment on settlement obtained by the claimant against the third-party tort-feasor pursuant to article 18 of the Insurance Law (no-fault). While this holding was in accord with appellate case law, as it then existed (see Matter of Granger v Urda, 54 AD2d 377; cf. Grello v Daszykowski, 58 AD2d 412), the Court of Appeals, in Matter of Granger v Urda (44 NY2d 91), subsequently held that the workers’ compensation carrier could assert its lien under the circumstances described. Accordingly, the order of Special Term must be reversed insofar as appealed from and plaintiff’s motion to vacate the carrier’s lien must be denied. Suozzi, J. P., Lazer, Rabin and Cohalan, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by Travelers Insurance Company, a workers’ compensation carrier, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated February 15, 1978, as granted the plaintiffs motion to vacate its lien on the settlement proceeds of the action between plaintiff and defendants. Order reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, without costs or disbursements, and plaintiff’s motion is denied. Special Term held that a workers’ compensation carrier, which has made payments for compensation and medical expenses to a claimant injured during the course of his employment, may not assert a lien pursuant to subdivision 1 of section 29 of the Workers’ Compensation Law against the proceeds of a judgment on settlement obtained by the claimant against the third-party tort-feasor pursuant to article 18 of the Insurance Law (no-fault). While this holding was in accord with appellate case law, as it then existed (see Matter of Granger v Urda, 54 AD2d 377; cf. Grello v Daszykowski, 58 AD2d 412), the Court of Appeals, in Matter of Granger v Urda (44 NY2d 91), subsequently held that the workers’ compensation carrier could assert its lien under the circumstances described. Accordingly, the order of Special Term must be reversed insofar as appealed from and plaintiff’s motion to vacate the carrier’s lien must be denied. Suozzi, J. P., Lazer, Rabin and Cohalan, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

68 A.D.2d 876, 414 N.Y.S.2d 42, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11105, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/blankoff-v-vitucci-nyappdiv-1979.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack