Congregation Nezach Israel v. ABGG Construction Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Congregation Nezach Israel v. ABGG Construction Inc.

38 A.D.3d 332, 830 N.Y.S.2d 662

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

DecidedMarch 15, 2007

StatusPublished

This text of 38 A.D.3d 332 (Congregation Nezach Israel v. ABGG Construction Inc.) 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

Congregation Nezach Israel v. ABGG Construction Inc., 38 A.D.3d 332, 830 N.Y.S.2d 662 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Lucy Billings, J.), entered on or about August 4, 2006, which denied defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court properly found an issue of fact as to whether the plaintiff in the underlying personal injury action suffered a grave injury, pursuant to Workers’ Compensation Law § 11 (see Altonen v Toyota Motor Credit Corp., 32 AD3d 342 [2006]). Defendant did not clearly establish that the victim had not suffered permanent and severe facial disfigurement (Fleming v Graham, 34 AD3d 525 [2006]; cf. Krollman v Food Automation Serv. Techniques, Inc., 13 AD3d 1209 [2004]). Concur—Mazzarelli, J.E, Williams, Gonzalez, Catterson and Kavanagh, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Lucy Billings, J.), entered on or about August 4, 2006, which denied defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court properly found an issue of fact as to whether the plaintiff in the underlying personal injury action suffered a grave injury, pursuant to Workers’ Compensation Law § 11 (see Altonen v Toyota Motor Credit Corp., 32 AD3d 342 [2006]). Defendant did not clearly establish that the victim had not suffered permanent and severe facial disfigurement (Fleming v Graham, 34 AD3d 525 [2006]; cf. Krollman v Food Automation Serv. Techniques, Inc., 13 AD3d 1209 [2004]). Concur—Mazzarelli, J.E, Williams, Gonzalez, Catterson and Kavanagh, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

38 A.D.3d 332, 830 N.Y.S.2d 662, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/congregation-nezach-israel-v-abgg-construction-inc-nyappdiv-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack