Meis v. ELO ORGANIZATION, LLC
This text of 767 N.E.2d 146 (Meis v. ELO ORGANIZATION, LLC) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
*716 OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed, with costs, the third-party defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the second and third third-party complaints granted and the certified question answered in the negative.
Workers’ Compensation Law § 11 does not list the loss of a thumb as a “grave injury,” and plaintiff failed to demonstrate that due to the amputation of his thumb he suffers a “permanent and total loss of use” of the hand (see Workers’ Compensation Law § 11). Plaintiffs argument that the loss of his thumb automatically renders his hand totally useless is unavailing. As this Court recently held in Castro v United Container Mach. Group (96 NY2d 398, 401 [2001]), “[injuries qualifying as grave are narrowly defined * * * [and the w]ords in [the] statute are to be given their plain meaning without resort to forced or unnatural interpretations.”
Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Smith, Levine, Ciparick, Wesley, Rosenblatt and Graffeo concur in memorandum.
On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.4), order reversed, etc.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
767 N.E.2d 146, 97 N.Y.2d 714, 740 N.Y.S.2d 689, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/meis-v-elo-organization-llc-ny-2002.