Legal Opinion

Heritage v. Van Patten

New York Court of Appeals

Decided July 7, 1983PublishedCited by 105 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.

To impose liability upon defendant Van Patten, owner of the land on which plaintiff, a coemployee of Van Patten, *1019was injured, by virtue of section 241 of the Labor Law would be to disregard the express legislative prohibition established by subdivision 6 of section 29 of the Workers’ Compensation Law which makes compensation the exclusive remedy of an employee injured “by the negligence or wrong of another in the same employ.” To paraphrase Williams v Hartshorn (296 NY 49, 50-51): Regardless of…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Williams v. HartshornNew York Court of Appeals · 1946
  2. Naso v. LafataNew York Court of Appeals · 1958
  3. Rauch v. JonesNew York Court of Appeals · 1958
  4. Sikora v. KeillorNew York Court of Appeals · 1963
  5. Malone v. JacobsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1982

3Cited by105 opinions

  1. Liss v. Trans Auto Systems, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1986
  2. Fung v. Japan Airlines Co.New York Court of Appeals · 2007
  3. MacChirole v. GiamboiNew York Court of Appeals · 2001
  4. Gonzales v. Armac Industries, Ltd.New York Court of Appeals · 1993
  5. Caceras v. ZorbasNew York Court of Appeals · 1989

100 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API