WECHSLER v. Double L. Contracting Co., defendant. (2006)

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant Diamond Sugar Co., Inc., appeals from (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Douglass, J.), dated October 6, 2004, and (2) an amended order of the same court dated December 1, 2004, which denied its motion pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(1) and (5) to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against it.

ORDERED that the appeal from the order dated October 6, 2004, is dismissed, as that order was superseded by the amended order dated December 1, 2004;  and it is further,

ORDERED that the amended order dated December 1, 2004 is affirmed;  and it is further,

ORDERED that one bill of costs is awarded to the respondents.

 “The meaning and coverage of a general release depends on the controversy being settled and upon the purpose for which the release was actually given ․ A release may not be read to cover matters which the parties did not desire or intend to dispose of” (Lefrak SBN Assoc. v. Kennedy Galleries, 203 A.D.2d 256, 257, 609 N.Y.S.2d 651 [citation omitted];  see Ofman v. Campos, 12 A.D.3d 581, 581-582, 788 N.Y.S.2d 115;  Demaria v. Brenhouse, 277 A.D.2d 344, 716 N.Y.S.2d 99;  Alcantara v. 603-607 Realty Assoc., 273 A.D.2d 329, 330, 710 N.Y.S.2d 99;  Meyer v. Fanelli, 266 A.D.2d 361, 698 N.Y.S.2d 311;  Grab v. Jewish Assn. for Servs. for Aging, 254 A.D.2d 455, 456, 679 N.Y.S.2d 313).   Here, the general release of liability was part of a severance agreement with the injured plaintiff's employer, an affiliate of the defendant Diamond Sugar Co., Inc., and contained no clear or specific language regarding personal injury claims (see e.g. Bugel v. WPS Niagara Props., 19 A.D.3d 1081, 1082, 797 N.Y.S.2d 232;  Wild v. Finger Lakes Racing Assn., 191 A.D.2d 995, 595 N.Y.S.2d 590).   As such, this general release does not bar the plaintiffs' claims.