Legal Opinion

Connell v. Brink

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

Decided December 29, 1993No. Appeal No. 1Published

1Opinion of the Court

Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs, motion denied and complaint reinstated. Memorandum: Supreme Court should have denied defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Defendant failed to establish, as a matter of law, that plaintiffs negligence cause of action against him, a coemployee, is barred by the exclusivity provisions of Workers’ Compensation Law § 29 (6). To have the protection of that statute, a defendant must himself have been in the course of his employment at the time of the injury (see, Maines v Cronomer Val. Fire Dept., 50 NY2d 535, 543).…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Maines v. Cronomer Valley Fire Dept., Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1980
  2. Manzoni v. HoffarthAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1987

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API