Home/Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York/Finkelstein v. Zirinsky

Finkelstein v. Zirinsky

202 A.D.2d 551, 610 N.Y.S.2d 820, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2656
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 21, 1994·Published

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Huttner, J.), entered April 9, 1992, which granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiff’s complaint was properly dismissed as barred by the Workers’ Compensation Law (see, Heritage v Van Patten, 59 NY2d 1017; Johnson v Eaton Corp., 178 AD2d 101; Caceras v Zorbas, 148 AD2d 339, affd 74 NY2d 884). Sullivan, J. P., Lawrence, Pizzuto, Joy and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

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

Finkelstein v. Zirinsky, 202 A.D.2d 551, 610 N.Y.S.2d 820, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2656 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

202 A.D.2d 551 (Finkelstein v. Zirinsky) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Heritage v. Van Patten
453 N.E.2d 1247 (New York Court of Appeals, 1983)
Caceras v. Zorbas
547 N.E.2d 89 (New York Court of Appeals, 1989)
Caceras v. Zorbas
148 A.D.2d 339 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1989)
Johnson v. Eaton Corp.
178 A.D.2d 101 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1991)