FROEHLE v. Waldbaum, Inc., third-party defendant-respondent. (2000)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Diane FROEHLE, plaintiff, v. HOBART CORPORATION, et al., defendants third-party plaintiffs-appellants; Waldbaum, Inc., third-party defendant-respondent.

Decided: March 13, 2000

DAVID S. RITTER, J.P., THOMAS R. SULLIVAN, SONDRA MILLER, DANIEL F. LUCIANO and HOWARD MILLER, JJ.

Thompson Hine & Flory, LLP, New York, N.Y. (Lester Schwab Katz & Dwyer [Steven B. Prystowsky and Saul Wilensky] of counsel), for defendants third-party plaintiffs-appellants. Kral, Clerkin, Redmond, Ryan, Perry & Girvan, Mineola, N.Y. (Elizabeth Gelfand Kastner of counsel), for third-party defendant-respondent.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants third-party plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (D'Emilio, J.), entered April 29, 1999, which granted the motion of the third-party defendant for summary judgment dismissing the third-party complaint.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the contention of the defendants third-party plaintiffs, Workers' Compensation Law § 11, as amended (L. 1996, ch. 635, § 2), is applicable here, since the action was commenced after the effective date of the amendment (see, Majewski v. Broadalbin-Perth Cent. School Dist., 91 N.Y.2d 577, 590, 673 N.Y.S.2d 966, 696 N.E.2d 978; Browning v. County Fence Co., 259 A.D.2d 578, 686 N.Y.S.2d 491).

MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Welcome to FindLaw's Cases & Codes

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.

Go To Learn About The Law