Matie v. Sealed Air Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Matie v. Sealed Air Corp.

242 A.D.2d 863, 665 N.Y.S.2d 360, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10394

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

DecidedSeptember 30, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 242 A.D.2d 863 (Matie v. Sealed Air Corp.) 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

Matie v. Sealed Air Corp., 242 A.D.2d 863, 665 N.Y.S.2d 360, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10394 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly denied the motion of third-party defendant, Ferro Corporation, for leave to amend its answer to assert as a defense the recent amendment to Workers’ Compensation Law § 11 and, upon the amendment of the answer, for summary judgment dismissing the third-party complaint. Because the amendment to Workers’ Compensation Law § 11, which became effective September 10, 1996, is prospective only, it does not apply to actions pending on that date (see, L 1996, ch 635, § 2; Massella v Partner Indus. Prods., 242 AD2d 870 [decided herewith] ; Majewski v Broadalbin-Perth Cent. School Dist., 231 AD2d 102; Morales v Gross, 230 AD2d 7). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Notaro, J.—Summary Judgment.) Present—Denman, P. J., Pine, Balio, Boehm and Fallon, JJ.

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

Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly denied the motion of third-party defendant, Ferro Corporation, for leave to amend its answer to assert as a defense the recent amendment to Workers’ Compensation Law § 11 and, upon the amendment of the answer, for summary judgment dismissing the third-party complaint. Because the amendment to Workers’ Compensation Law § 11, which became effective September 10, 1996, is prospective only, it does not apply to actions pending on that date (see, L 1996, ch 635, § 2; Massella v Partner Indus. Prods., 242 AD2d 870 [decided herewith] ; Majewski v Broadalbin-Perth Cent. School Dist., 231 AD2d 102; Morales v Gross, 230 AD2d 7). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Notaro, J.—Summary Judgment.) Present—Denman, P. J., Pine, Balio, Boehm and Fallon, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

242 A.D.2d 863, 665 N.Y.S.2d 360, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10394, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matie-v-sealed-air-corp-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack