From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mayorga v. Reed-Prentice Packaging Mach. Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 29, 1996
226 A.D.2d 687 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

Opinion

April 29, 1996

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Doyle, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

The appellant's papers were insufficient to establish, as a matter of law, that the plaintiffs' causes of action against it were precluded by the exclusivity provisions of the Workers' Compensation Law ( see generally, Thompson v. Grumman Aerospace Corp., 78 N.Y.2d 553, 557-558; Abuso v. Mack Trucks, 174 A.D.2d 590, 590-591; Poppenberg v. Reliable Maintenance Corp., 89 A.D.2d 791). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the appellant's motion for summary judgment. Mangano, P.J., Balletta, Copertino and Hart, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Mayorga v. Reed-Prentice Packaging Mach. Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 29, 1996
226 A.D.2d 687 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
Case details for

Mayorga v. Reed-Prentice Packaging Mach. Co.

Case Details

Full title:MIGUEL MAYORGA et al., Respondents, v. REED-PRENTICE PACKAGING MACHINERY…

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

Date published: Apr 29, 1996

Citations

226 A.D.2d 687 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
642 N.Y.S.2d 533