Sanders v. Southfield Heights, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Sanders v. Southfield Heights, Inc.

76 A.D.2d 859, 428 N.Y.S.2d 508, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11915

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

DecidedJune 9, 1980

StatusPublished

This text of 76 A.D.2d 859 (Sanders v. Southfield Heights, Inc.) 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

Sanders v. Southfield Heights, Inc., 76 A.D.2d 859, 428 N.Y.S.2d 508, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11915 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1980).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for wrongful death, plaintiff appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County, dated December 5, 1978, as granted defendant Southfield Heights, Inc.’s, motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against it. Order affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements. The complaint sets forth causes of action for negligence and wrongful death. No reasonable view of the allegations of the complaint would support a claim that the respondent was guilty of the infliction of an intentional tort. Sections 10 and 11 of the Workers’ Compensation Law were, therefore, an absolute bar to the institution of the present action against the respondent. Consequently, dismissal was proper (see Finch v Swingly, 42 AD2d 1035). Damiani, J. P., Lazer, Gibbons and O’Connor, JJ., concur.

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

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for wrongful death, plaintiff appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County, dated December 5, 1978, as granted defendant Southfield Heights, Inc.’s, motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against it. Order affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements. The complaint sets forth causes of action for negligence and wrongful death. No reasonable view of the allegations of the complaint would support a claim that the respondent was guilty of the infliction of an intentional tort. Sections 10 and 11 of the Workers’ Compensation Law were, therefore, an absolute bar to the institution of the present action against the respondent. Consequently, dismissal was proper (see Finch v Swingly, 42 AD2d 1035). Damiani, J. P., Lazer, Gibbons and O’Connor, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

76 A.D.2d 859, 428 N.Y.S.2d 508, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11915, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sanders-v-southfield-heights-inc-nyappdiv-1980.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack