Dextre v. Port Authority

244 A.D.2d 449, 665 N.Y.S.2d 914, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11621
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 17, 1997·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Polizzi, J.), dated December 16, 1996, as granted that branch of the defendants’ cross motion which was for summary judgment dismissing his cause of action pursuant to Labor Law § 200.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Since the defendants did not exercise any supervisory control over the plaintiff, or direct the plaintiff’s work, summary judgment dismissing the plaintiff’s common-law cause of action pursuant to Labor Law § 200 was properly granted (see, Comes [450]*450v New York State Elec. & Gas Corp., 82 NY2d 876; Lombardi v Stout, 80 NY2d 290). Rosenblatt, J. P., O’Brien, Thompson, Friedmann and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

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

Dextre v. Port Authority, 244 A.D.2d 449, 665 N.Y.S.2d 914, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11621 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

244 A.D.2d 449 (Dextre v. Port Authority) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

McGurran v. DiCanio Planned Development Corp.
251 A.D.2d 467 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1998)