§Why CasetextPricing

Maria Auqui,, et al., Respondents,v.Seven Thirty One Limited Partnership, et al., Appellants.

Brief

5 Cited authorities

  1. Johannesen v. New York City Department of Housing Preservation & Development

    84 N.Y.2d 129 (N.Y. 1994)   Cited 50 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Finding that plaintiff's asthma, caused by exposure to second-hand smoke, is covered by Workers' Compensation, explaining that "accidental injury" is a "term of art," and that "[t]he seriously adverse environmental conditions to which claimant was subjected as part of her job and workplace reasonably qualify as an unusual hazard"

  2. Ott v. Barash

    109 A.D.2d 254 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)   Cited 44 times
    In Ott v. Barash, 109 A.D.2d 254, 491 N.Y.S.2d 661, 662 (2d Dep't 1985), the question before the court was whether the plaintiff, who was allegedly injured as a result of negligence of a New York state (the "State") employee could maintain a cause of action for negligence against that employee after having settled a prior action against the State to recover damages for the same injuries.

  3. Casas v. Consol. Edison Co. of N.Y., Inc.

    105 A.D.3d 471 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)   Cited 4 times

    2013-04-9 Luis CASAS, etc., Plaintiff–Respondent, v. CONSOLIDATED EDISON COMPANY OF NEW YORK, INC., Defendant–Appellant. Armienti, DeBellis, Guglielmo & Rhoden, LLP, New York (Vanessa M. Corchia of counsel), for appellant. Annette G. Hasapidis, Mt. Kisco, for respondent. MAZZARELLI Armienti, DeBellis, Guglielmo & Rhoden, LLP, New York (Vanessa M. Corchia of counsel), for appellant. Annette G. Hasapidis, Mt. Kisco, for respondent. MAZZARELLI, J.P., ACOSTA, RENWICK, RICHTER, GISCHE, JJ. Order, Supreme

  4. Brugman v. City of New York

    102 A.D.2d 413 (N.Y. App. Div. 1984)   Cited 12 times

    June 28, 1984 Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County, David H. Edwards, Jr., J. Herbert Stutman of counsel ( Barton Zasky, attorneys), for appellants. Lester E. Fetell of counsel ( Peter I. Hoppenfeld with him on the brief; Fetell Coen, P.C., attorneys), for New York City Housing Authority, respondent. FEIN, J. Plaintiff Dennis Brugman, a sanitation man for the City of New York, sues to recover damages for injuries allegedly sustained on August 30, 1979. He claims that in the course of his

  5. Matter of Post v. Burger Gohlke

    216 N.Y. 544 (N.Y. 1916)   Cited 98 times
    In Post v. Burger Gohlke, 216 N.Y. 544 [ 111 N.E. 351, Ann. Cas. 1916B, 158], this extraterritorial effect was given the New York act on the basis of the fiction of a "constructive contract", on the theory that the legislature had the power "to compel a contract between employer and employee that is extraterritorial in effect".