Wirth v. Royal Coach Lines, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Wirth v. Royal Coach Lines, Inc.

111 A.D.2d 809, 490 N.Y.S.2d 1004, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 50053

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

DecidedJune 10, 1985

StatusPublished

This text of 111 A.D.2d 809 (Wirth v. Royal Coach Lines, 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

Wirth v. Royal Coach Lines, Inc., 111 A.D.2d 809, 490 N.Y.S.2d 1004, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 50053 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Sullivan, J.), entered May 2, 1984, which denied his motion to strike defendants’ second affirmative defense that the action is barred by the Workers’ Compensation Law, without prejudice to renewal.

Order affirmed, with costs.

The record fails to provide an adequate basis from which it can be determined whether the plaintiff was engaged in the course of his employment when the accident occurred. A more extensive development of the facts is necessary, and thus the plaintiff’s motion was properly denied (Cherney v Blair Chevrolet, 18 AD2d 915; Wolfson v Gershunoff, 277 App Div 1149). If it is unable to conclusively resolve this issue after discovery and upon renewal of the motion, the court may order an immediate trial of this issue pursuant to CPLR 3211 (c). Mollen, P. J., Niehoff, Rubin and Lawrence, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Sullivan, J.), entered May 2, 1984, which denied his motion to strike defendants’ second affirmative defense that the action is barred by the Workers’ Compensation Law, without prejudice to renewal.

Order affirmed, with costs.

The record fails to provide an adequate basis from which it can be determined whether the plaintiff was engaged in the course of his employment when the accident occurred. A more extensive development of the facts is necessary, and thus the plaintiff’s motion was properly denied (Cherney v Blair Chevrolet, 18 AD2d 915; Wolfson v Gershunoff, 277 App Div 1149). If it is unable to conclusively resolve this issue after discovery and upon renewal of the motion, the court may order an immediate trial of this issue pursuant to CPLR 3211 (c). Mollen, P. J., Niehoff, Rubin and Lawrence, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

111 A.D.2d 809, 490 N.Y.S.2d 1004, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 50053, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wirth-v-royal-coach-lines-inc-nyappdiv-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack