Matter of Rhames v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Matter of Rhames v. City of New York

130 A.D.3d 405, 11 N.Y.S.3d 482

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

DecidedJuly 2, 2015

Docket15608 308813/12

StatusPublished

This text of 130 A.D.3d 405 (Matter of Rhames v. City of New York) 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

Matter of Rhames v. City of New York, 130 A.D.3d 405, 11 N.Y.S.3d 482 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Julia Rodriguez, J.), entered April 17, 2014, which granted petitioner’s motion to deny respondent City of New York’s workers’ compensation lien, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion denied.

Petitioner, an employee of the Department of Education, was injured when, while helping to unload a delivery of paper inside the school building where he worked, the skid that was carrying the paper fell on his foot. Under the circumstances presented, petitioner is not entitled to recover no-fault benefits (see Insurance Law § 5103 [a] [1]), since the delivery person’s vehicle was clearly not a proximate cause of petitioner’s injuries (see Walton v Lumbermens Mut. Cas. Co., 88 NY2d 211, 215 [1996]). Accordingly, the application to deny the workers’ compensation lien should have been denied. Concur — Gonzalez, P.J., Sweeny, Renwick, Saxe and Feinman, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Julia Rodriguez, J.), entered April 17, 2014, which granted petitioner’s motion to deny respondent City of New York’s workers’ compensation lien, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion denied.

Petitioner, an employee of the Department of Education, was injured when, while helping to unload a delivery of paper inside the school building where he worked, the skid that was carrying the paper fell on his foot. Under the circumstances presented, petitioner is not entitled to recover no-fault benefits (see Insurance Law § 5103 [a] [1]), since the delivery person’s vehicle was clearly not a proximate cause of petitioner’s injuries (see Walton v Lumbermens Mut. Cas. Co., 88 NY2d 211, 215 [1996]). Accordingly, the application to deny the workers’ compensation lien should have been denied. Concur — Gonzalez, P.J., Sweeny, Renwick, Saxe and Feinman, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

130 A.D.3d 405, 11 N.Y.S.3d 482, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-rhames-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-2015.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack