Lebron v. SML Vet. Leather, LLC, 5 N.E.3d 999 (NY 2014). · Go Syfert
Search
Lebron v. SML Vet. Leather, LLC, 5 N.E.3d 999 (NY 2014). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
1 citation event across 1 distinct court.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Nelson Lebron
v.
SML Veteran Leather, LLC
New York Court of Appeals.
Feb 20, 2014.
5 N.E.3d 999
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.
Abdus, Graffeo, Lippman, Pigott, Read, Rivera, Salaam, Smith.
Cited by 1 opinion  |  Published

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.

[*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.