Legal Opinion

Caceras v. Zorbas

New York Court of Appeals

Decided October 26, 1989PublishedCited by 37 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

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

Plaintiff was injured in the course of his employment and instituted this action against defendant, who was both the owner of the building where the accident happened and the president and sole stockholder of plaintiff’s corporate employer (the lessee of the premises). The complaint did not allege workers’ compensation benefits were unavailable. In fact, plaintiff applied for and received such benefits. The defendant’s original answer did not assert the Workers’ Compensation Law as an affirmative…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Murray v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1977
  2. Heritage v. Van PattenNew York Court of Appeals · 1983

3Cited by37 opinions

  1. Kimso Apartments, LLC v. Mahesh GandhiNew York Court of Appeals · 2014
  2. GMAC Mtge., LLC v. CoombsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2020
  3. Lanpont v. Savvas Cab Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
  4. Cusano v. StaffAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993
  5. Coleman v. WorsterAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2016

32 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