Cannon v. State

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Cannon v. State

232 A.D.2d 444, 648 N.Y.S.2d 349, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10171

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

DecidedOctober 15, 1996

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 232 A.D.2d 444 (Cannon v. State) 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

Cannon v. State, 232 A.D.2d 444, 648 N.Y.S.2d 349, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10171 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

—In a claim to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the claimants appeal from a judgment of the Court of Claims (Silverman, J.), dated October 26, 1995, which, after a nonjury trial, is in favor of the defendant and against them, dismissing the claim.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

We agree with the trial court that the claimant William J. Cannon was injured as the result of a risk inherent in the task being performed, and not as the result of any negligence on the part of the State. Therefore, the court properly dismissed the claim brought pursuant to Labor Law § 200 (see, Stephens v Tucker, 184 AD2d 828; Gasper v Ford Motor Co., 13 NY2d 104). Mangano, P. J., Rosenblatt, Sullivan and Hart, JJ., concur.

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

—In a claim to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the claimants appeal from a judgment of the Court of Claims (Silverman, J.), dated October 26, 1995, which, after a nonjury trial, is in favor of the defendant and against them, dismissing the claim.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

We agree with the trial court that the claimant William J. Cannon was injured as the result of a risk inherent in the task being performed, and not as the result of any negligence on the part of the State. Therefore, the court properly dismissed the claim brought pursuant to Labor Law § 200 (see, Stephens v Tucker, 184 AD2d 828; Gasper v Ford Motor Co., 13 NY2d 104). Mangano, P. J., Rosenblatt, Sullivan and Hart, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

232 A.D.2d 444, 648 N.Y.S.2d 349, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10171, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cannon-v-state-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack