Legal Opinion
Pantolo v. Lane
New York Supreme Court
Decided July 3, 1945PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtDeyo, J.
The plaintiff alleges -that he was injured through the negligence of the defendant, a coemployee of Endicott-Johnson Corporation. The accident took place on the parking lot which the company maintains for its employees while they were both arriving for work. The defendant was operating his automobile and the plaintiff was on foot. It now seems to be definitely established that subdivision 6 of section 29 of the Workmen’s Compensation Law is a bar to an action by an employee against his coemployee for damages resulting from the coemployee’s negligence. (Abbondondolo v. Mealing, 249 App. Div.…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Claim of Kowalek v. New York Consolidated RailroadNew York Court of Appeals · 1920
- Caulfield v. Elmhurst Contracting Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1945
- Matter of Lynch v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1926
- D'Agostino v. WagenaarNew York Supreme Court · 1944
- Puccio v. CarrNew York Supreme Court · 1941
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Warner v. LederSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
- Kowcun v. BybeeOregon Supreme Court · 1947
- United States Casualty Co. v. RussellCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1958
- Nolan v. DaleySupreme Court of South Carolina · 1952
- State Compensation Insurance Fund v. WalterSupreme Court of Colorado · 1960
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.