McKnight v. Mariner Restaurant

2 A.D.3d 1296, 769 N.Y.S.2d 811, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14159
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 31, 2003
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 2 A.D.3d 1296 (McKnight v. Mariner Restaurant) 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
McKnight v. Mariner Restaurant, 2 A.D.3d 1296, 769 N.Y.S.2d 811, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14159 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Opinion

Appeal from an order of Supreme Court, Jefferson County [1297]*1297(Gilbert, J.), entered October 31, 2002, which, inter alia, denied defendants’ cross motion for summary judgment seeking to dismiss the complaint and directed defendants to appear for deposition.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously modified on the law by granting defendants’ cross motion in part and dismissing the negligence claim and as modified the order is affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Plaintiffs commenced this action asserting claims for negligence and assault based on an incident in which defendant Lawrence Comins, the owner of defendant Mariner Restaurant (Restaurant), allegedly assaulted Tracy McKnight (plaintiff), a Restaurant employee. Supreme Court properly denied that part of defendants’ cross motion for summary judgment seeking to dismiss plaintiffs’ assault claim. The exclusivity provisions of Workers’ Compensation Law § 29 (6) do not bar a cause of action for intentional assault, even where, as here, plaintiff has applied for and received workers’ compensation benefits based on the determination of the Workers’ Compensation Board that the incident occurred within the course of plaintiff’s employment (see Ralph v Oliver, 186 AD2d 977 [1992]). However, the court erred in denying that part of defendants’ cross motion seeking to dismiss plaintiffs’ negligence claim, inasmuch as that claim is barred by Workers’ Compensation Law § 29 (6) (see Maines v Cronomer Val. Fire Dept., 50 NY2d 535, 542-543 [1980]; Legault v Brown, 283 App Div 303, 304 [1954]). Present—Pine, J.P., Wisner, Hurlbutt, Gorski and Lawton, JJ.

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

Related

Bates v. Gannett Co., Inc.
2024 NY Slip Op 03999 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2024)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2 A.D.3d 1296, 769 N.Y.S.2d 811, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14159, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcknight-v-mariner-restaurant-nyappdiv-2003.