Niagara Frontier Transportation Authority v. Hartford Insurance
This text of 210 A.D.2d 970 (Niagara Frontier Transportation Authority v. Hartford Insurance) 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.
Opinion
—Judgment unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed without costs in accordance with the following Memorandum: Supreme Court erred in granting defendant’s cross motion for summary judgment. Defendant failed to meet its initial burden of showing that plaintiff’s employee, Emmett Turner, was a seaman within the meaning of the Jones Act (46 USC, Appendix § 688), and thus failed to establish its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law (see, Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 562; Salgado v Rudolph Corp., 514 F2d 750, 755; Harney v Moore Bldg. Corp., 359 F2d 649, 654). (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Flaherty, J.—Declaratory Judgment.) Present— Pine, J. P., Lawton, Fallon, Davis and Boehm, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
210 A.D.2d 970, 621 N.Y.S.2d 967, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13459, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/niagara-frontier-transportation-authority-v-hartford-insurance-nyappdiv-1994.