Hyperlawhypertext legal databasebeta Lebron v. SML Veteran Leather, LLC 22 N.Y.3d 1119

← Cases

Lebron v. SML Veteran Leather, LLC

22 N.Y.3d 1119 Court N.Y. Decision date 2014-02-20 English

Judges Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott and Rivera concur; Judge Abdus-Salaam taking no part.

Contents

Majority

p. 1119
[5 NE3d 999, 982 NYS2d 836]
Nelson Lebron, Appellant, v SML Veteran Leather, LLC, Respondent.
Decided February 20, 2014
p. 1120
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Pollack, Pollack, Isaac & De Cicco, New York City (Brian J. Isaac of counsel), and Okun Oddo & Babat, PC. (Darren Seilback of counsel), for appellant.
The Law Offices of Edward M. Eustace, White Plains (Christopher M. Yapchanyk of counsel), for respondent.

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.

Applying New Jersey law and viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to plaintiff (see Laidlow v Hariton Mach. Co., Inc., 170 NJ 602 , 607, 790 A2d 884 , 887 [2002]), defendant SML Veteran Leather, LLC demonstrated its entitlement to summary judgment dismissing the complaint against it. Plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact whether defendant’s conduct constituted an intentional wrong under the New Jersey Workers’ Compensation Act (see NJ Stat Ann § 34:15-8; compare Mull v Zeta Consumer Prods., 176 NJ 385 , 392, 823 A2d 782 , 786 [2003]; Laidlow, 170 NJ at 622 , 790 A2d at 897-898 ).

Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott and Rivera concur; Judge Abdus-Salaam taking no part.

p. 1121
On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.