From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

SANTOS v. FLORAL PARK LODGE OF FREE AND ACC

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 17, 1999
261 A.D.2d 526 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)

Opinion

May 17, 1999

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Golia, J.).


Ordered that the appeal from the order dated April 27, 1998, is dismissed, as that order was superseded by the order dated August 21, 1998, made upon reargument; and it is further,

Ordered that the order dated August 21, 1998, is affirmed insofar as appealed from; and it is further,

Ordered that the respondent is awarded one bill of costs.

The Omnibus Workers' Compensation Act of 1996 (Workers' Compensation Law § 11 Work. Comp., as amended, L 1996, ch 635, § 2; hereinafter the Act), does not bar a third-party action against an employer premised upon the employer's alleged breach of an agreement to procure liability insurance ( Majewski v. Broadalbin-Perth Cent. School Dist., 91 N.Y.2d 577; Morales v. Gross, 230 A.D.2d 7; cf., Kinney v. Lisk Co., 76 N.Y.2d 215; see also, Kinns v. Schulz, 131 A.D.2d 957; Yauchler v. Bailey, 116 A.D.2d 905). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied that branch of the third-party defendants' motion which sought dismissal of this claim under the Act.

The third-party defendants' remaining contentions are without merit.

Thompson, J. P., Sullivan, Joy and Schmidt, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

SANTOS v. FLORAL PARK LODGE OF FREE AND ACC

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 17, 1999
261 A.D.2d 526 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
Case details for

SANTOS v. FLORAL PARK LODGE OF FREE AND ACC

Case Details

Full title:EVANGELOS SANTOS, Plaintiff, v. FLORAL PARK LODGE OF FREE AND ACCEPTED…

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

Date published: May 17, 1999

Citations

261 A.D.2d 526 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
690 N.Y.S.2d 634

Citing Cases

Uddin v. A.TA. Constr. Corp.

Having concluded that BD is not contractually bound to indemnify ATA/Flan, the Court need not reach the…

Smith v. AJ Contracting Co.

Thus, the proof shows, at the least, a factual question as to the existence of an agreement requiring L L to…