Mark B. v. County of Onondaga

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Mark B. v. County of Onondaga

273 A.D.2d 834, 710 N.Y.S.2d 268, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6711

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

DecidedJune 16, 2000

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 273 A.D.2d 834 (Mark B. v. County of Onondaga) 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

Mark B. v. County of Onondaga, 273 A.D.2d 834, 710 N.Y.S.2d 268, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6711 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly granted defendant’s motion seeking dismissal of the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a). The allegation that defendant intentionally ignored a known hazard does not bring the case within the “intentional injury” exception to the exclusivity provision of the Workers’ Compensation Law (see, Workers’ Compensation Law § 11; Acevedo v Consolidated Edison Co., 189 AD2d 497, 500-501, lv dismissed 82 NY2d 748; Briggs v Pymm Thermometer Corp., 147 AD2d 433, 435; Ferrara v American ACMI, 122 AD2d 930, 931; Finch v Swingly, 42 AD2d 1035; see also, Patterson v Salvation Army, 203 AD2d 87, 88). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Onondaga County, Elliott, J.— Dismiss Pleading.) Present — Pine, J. P., Wisner, Hurlbutt and Scudder, JJ.

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

—Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly granted defendant’s motion seeking dismissal of the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a). The allegation that defendant intentionally ignored a known hazard does not bring the case within the “intentional injury” exception to the exclusivity provision of the Workers’ Compensation Law (see, Workers’ Compensation Law § 11; Acevedo v Consolidated Edison Co., 189 AD2d 497, 500-501, lv dismissed 82 NY2d 748; Briggs v Pymm Thermometer Corp., 147 AD2d 433, 435; Ferrara v American ACMI, 122 AD2d 930, 931; Finch v Swingly, 42 AD2d 1035; see also, Patterson v Salvation Army, 203 AD2d 87, 88). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Onondaga County, Elliott, J.— Dismiss Pleading.) Present — Pine, J. P., Wisner, Hurlbutt and Scudder, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

273 A.D.2d 834, 710 N.Y.S.2d 268, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6711, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mark-b-v-county-of-onondaga-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack