Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Joanna Hamilton MANSWELL, et al., Plaintiffs-Respondents, v. ST. LUKE'S HOSPITAL, et al., Defendants-Appellants, “John Doe,” et al., Defendants.
Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Janice L. Bowman, J.), entered December 24, 2003, which denied defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Plaintiff wife contracted a serious virus in the course of her employment as a neonatal nurse at defendant hospital. She went to the hospital's emergency room and was admitted. She and her husband brought this action alleging malpractice and negligence by the hospital and various medical professionals in causing an exacerbation of her injuries. Defendants argue that the action is barred by the wife's prior successful application for workers' compensation benefits for the same injuries.
It is well settled that neither § 11 nor § 29 of the Workers' Compensation Law bars the claim of a hospital employee who alleges negligent care by the hospital under these circumstances, even if the underlying injury was suffered in the course of employment (cf. Feliciano-Delgado v. New York Hotel Trades Council & Hotel Assoc. of N.Y. City Health Ctr., 281 A.D.2d 312, 722 N.Y.S.2d 498 [2001] ). The fact that the same injuries form the basis for both claims is immaterial (Firestein v. Kingsbrook Jewish Med. Ctr., 137 A.D.2d 34, 528 N.Y.S.2d 85 [1988] ). Plaintiffs cannot recover twice because the proceeds of this action are subject to a workers' compensation lien (id. at 37-38, 528 N.Y.S.2d 85). Furthermore, there are questions of fact as to whether plaintiff's injuries result inexorably from her illness, for which she could not recover in this action as defendants argue, or from defendants' negligence.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: March 10, 2005
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)