AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes

JAMES M. CONSTANTINE et al., Appellants, v. SPERRY CORPORATION et al., Respondents.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiff James Constantine sustained physical injuries when the van in which he was a passenger struck a curb causing him to fall out of his seat. The van was leased by the plaintiff's employer, Sperry Corporation, for the purpose of transporting its employees to and from work in an effort to lessen the congestion of its parking lot. The van was operated by a fellow employee of the plaintiff, the defendant Oligario. Under these circumstances, the plaintiff's injuries arose out of and in the course of his employment with the defendant Sperry Corporation (see, Matter of Holcomb v. Daily News, 45 N.Y.2d 602). Therefore, the plaintiff's sole remedy is the one provided by the Workers' Compensation Law (see, Workers' Compensation Law § 29). Since both the plaintiff's employer and co-worker are immune from suit, there can be no liability imputed to Gelco Corporation, the owner of the van (see, Heritage v. Van Patten, 59 N.Y.2d 1017, 1019; Ulysse v. Nelsk Taxi, 135 A.D.2d 528, 530). In light of the fact that the primary cause of action must fall, the derivative cause of action by the plaintiff's wife must also be dismissed (see, Eagleston v. Mt. Sinai Med. Center, 144 A.D.2d 427). Mangano, J.P., Kooper, Sullivan and Harwood, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

CONSTANTINE v. SPERRY CORPORATION
(Apr 3, 1989)