Ginsberg v. Industrial Home for the Blind

124 A.D.2d 781, 508 N.Y.S.2d 261, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 62100

This text of 124 A.D.2d 781 (Ginsberg v. Industrial Home for the Blind) 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
Ginsberg v. Industrial Home for the Blind, 124 A.D.2d 781, 508 N.Y.S.2d 261, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 62100 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1986).

Opinion

The undisputed facts presented to the court on the defendants’ motion for summary judgment establish, as a matter of law, that the transportation-related injury to the plaintiff Seymour Ginsberg arose out of, and in the course of his employment with the defendant Industrial Home for the Blind (see, Matter of Holcomb v Daily News, 45 NY2d 602). Accordingly, Special Term was correct in granting the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the plaintiffs’ exclusive remedy lies under the Workers’ Compensation Law (see, Workers’ Compensation Law § 11). Mangano, J. P., Weinstein, Lawrence and Fiber, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Claim of Holcomb v. Daily News
384 N.E.2d 665 (New York Court of Appeals, 1978)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
124 A.D.2d 781, 508 N.Y.S.2d 261, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 62100, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ginsberg-v-industrial-home-for-the-blind-nyappdiv-1986.