From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Harrigan v. Friend

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Mar 14, 1997
237 A.D.2d 976 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)

Opinion

March 14, 1997.

Order unanimously affirmed with costs.

Present — Denman, P.J., Green, Doerr, Balio and Fallon, JJ.


Supreme Court properly denied defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint pursuant to the exclusive remedy provisions of the Workers' Compensation Law ( see, Workers' Compensation Law §§ 11, 29). Defendants failed to establish as a matter of law that plaintiff was in the special employ of defendant Videoseal Corp. at the time of her accident ( see, Kinney v Kuhn, 122 AD2d 569, 570; see generally, Thompson v Grumman Aerospace Corp., 78 NY2d 553, 557-558). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Niagara County, Rath, Jr., J. — Summary Judgment.)


Summaries of

Harrigan v. Friend

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Mar 14, 1997
237 A.D.2d 976 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
Case details for

Harrigan v. Friend

Case Details

Full title:DIANNE HARRIGAN, Respondent, v. KENNETH FRIEND, JR., et al., Appellants

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

Date published: Mar 14, 1997

Citations

237 A.D.2d 976 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
656 N.Y.S.2d 986