Jones v. Bartlett
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
—Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: We agree with plaintiff that defendants should have moved to amend their answer to assert the defense based on Workers’ Compensation Law § 29 (6) before including that defense as one of the bases for their motion for summary judgment dismissing the amended complaint (see, Cole v Rappazzo Elec. Co., 267 AD2d 735, 738; see also, Murray v City of New York, 43 NY2d 400, 404-406, rearg dismissed 45 NY2d 966). We conclude, however, that Supreme Court nevertheless properly granted defendants’ motion and denied plaintiff’s cross motion for…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Murray v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1977
- Pekarsky v. Commissioner of the New York State Department of Social ServicesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1999
- Izrailev v. Ficarra Furniture of Long Island, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1987
- Dalzell v. McDonald's Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995
- Neville v. DetersAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Rose v. Niagara Mohawk Power Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002