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.
Vincent TASSONE, et al., Plaintiffs, v. HAGGAR APPAREL COMPANY, et al., Defendants.
Haggar Apparel Company and McCurdy & Company, Inc., Third-Party Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company, Third-Party Defendant-Respondent.
Supreme Court erred in granting third-party defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the third-party complaint. The 1996 amendment to Workers' Compensation Law § 11 (see, L.1996, ch. 635, § 2) does not apply retroactively to bar the third-party action (see, Regensdorfer v. Central Buffalo Project Corp., 247 A.D.2d 931, 933, 668 N.Y.S.2d 291; Massella v. Partner Indus. Prods., 242 A.D.2d 870, 665 N.Y.S.2d 948). Further, the release given by Vincent Tassone (plaintiff) to third-party defendant does not relieve third-party defendant from liability to third-party plaintiffs for contribution pursuant to General Obligations Law § 15-108(b). That section applies to releases “given to one of two or more persons liable or claimed to be liable in tort for the same injury” (General Obligations Law § 15-108[a] ). As plaintiff's employer, third-party defendant cannot be held liable in tort; its liability under the Workers' Compensation Law is “exclusive and in place of any other liability whatsoever” (Workers' Compensation Law § 11; see, Gonzales v. Armac Indus., 81 N.Y.2d 1, 9, 595 N.Y.S.2d 360, 611 N.E.2d 261). Thus, plaintiff had no tort claim against third-party defendant that could be released, and General Obligations Law § 15-108(b) does not bar the third-party action for contribution.
Order unanimously reversed on the law with costs, motion denied and third-party complaint reinstated.
MEMORANDUM:
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 31, 1999
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth 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)