Legal Opinion
Urig v. Cigna Property & Casualty Companies
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided November 21, 1994Published
1Opinion of the Court
—In a proceeding pursuant to Workers’ Compensation Law § 29 (5) for an order approving the settlement of an action nunc pro tunc, the petitioner appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Shaw, J.), dated April 16, 1993, which denied the application and dismissed the proceeding.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
We agree with the Supreme Court that the instant proceeding is barred by the previous dismissal with prejudice of an identical application by the petitioner in the United States District Court (see, Schuylkill Fuel Corp. v Nieberg Realty Corp., 250 NY 304).…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Schuylkill Fuel Corp. v. B. & C. Nieberg Realty Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1929
- Claim of Johnson v. Buffalo & Erie County Private Industry CouncilNew York Court of Appeals · 1994
- Claim of Parmelee v. International Paper Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
- Claim of Durham v. Barker Chemical Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989