From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

French v. Shaft

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 2, 1989
154 A.D.2d 336 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)

Opinion

October 2, 1989

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Beisner, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

It is well settled that where an employee has been awarded, and has accepted, workers' compensation benefits, she may not claim that the accident in which she was injured did not occur in the course of her employment and maintain an action against her employer or any coemployee involved (see, Mylroie v GAF Corp., 55 N.Y.2d 893). Since an award was made herein, "it necessarily follows that the [Workers'] Compensation Board determined that an employer-employee relationship obtained and, further, that the [accident in which the plaintiff was injured] arose out of and in the course of claimant['s] employment" (see, Velasquez v Pine Grove Resort Ranch, 61 A.D.2d 1102, 1103). Because she accepted benefits under the Workers' Compensation Law, the plaintiff cannot thereafter collaterally attack the award in an action at law and assert that the accident in which she was injured did not occur in the course of her employment (see, Cunningham v State of New York, 60 N.Y.2d 248). Therefore, this action is barred by the exclusivity provisions of the Workers' Compensation Law §§ 10, 11 and 29 (6) (see, Heritage v Van Patten, 90 A.D.2d 936, affd 59 N.Y.2d 1017). Eiber, J.P., Harwood, Balletta and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

French v. Shaft

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 2, 1989
154 A.D.2d 336 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)
Case details for

French v. Shaft

Case Details

Full title:SANDRA FRENCH, Appellant, v. STEVEN SHAFT et al., Respondents

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Oct 2, 1989

Citations

154 A.D.2d 336 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)
545 N.Y.S.2d 814

Citing Cases

Quizhpe v. Luvin Construction

Thus, since the defendant Sanchez is statutorily immune from suit, Luvin Construction cannot therefore be…

Wysocki v. Balalis

The Supreme Court also erred in denying Prevail's motion. Since the plaintiff was employed by Prevail and…