green
Positive treatment
14.4 score
Top citers, strongest first. 7 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Robles v. Holy See (State of Vatican City The Vatican)
Mazzarella v. Syracuse Diocese, 100 A.D.3d 1384, 1385 (4th Dep’t 2012) (citations omitted).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Gehrke v. Mustang Sally's Spirits & Grill, Inc.
Although it is generally a question for the jury whether an employee is acting within the scope of employment ( see Riviello v Waldron , 47 NY2d 297, 303 [1979]; Carlson v Porter [appeal No. 2], 53 AD3d 1129, 1131-1132 [4th Dept 2008], lv denied 11 NY3d 708 [2008]), an employer is not liable as a matter of law under the theory of respondeat superior "if the employee was acting solely for personal motives unrelated to the furtherance of the employer's business' " ( Mazzarella v Syracuse Diocese [appeal No. 2], 100 AD3d 1384, 1385 [4th Dept 2012]).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Dunn v. County of Niagara
Although it is generally a question for the jury whether an employee is acting within the scope of employment ( see id. ; Carlson v Porter [appeal No. 2], 53 AD3d 1129 , 1131 [4th Dept 2008], lv denied 11 NY3d 708 [2008]), an employer is not liable as a matter of law "if the employee was acting solely for personal motives unrelated to the furtherance of the employer's business' " ( Mazzarella v Syracuse Diocese [appeal No. 2], 100 AD3d 1384, 1385 [4th Dept 2012]).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
ABRAHA, LUAM K. v. ADAMS, M.D., CRISTINE M.
That contention is unpreserved for our review because defendants failed to object to the court’s directive regarding the privilege log before the court ruled on the discoverability of the records (see Mazzarella v Syracuse Diocese [appeal No. 2], 100 AD3d 1384, 1385-1386 [2012]).
discussed
Cited "see"
Stevens v. Kellar
(2×)
“The doctrine of respondeat superior renders an employer vicariously liable for the tortious acts of its employees only if those acts were committed in furtherance of the employer’s business and within the scope of employment” (Burlarley v Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 75 AD3d 955, 956 [2010] [internal quotation marks and citation omitted]; see Mazzarella v Syracuse Diocese, 100 AD3d 1384, 1385 [2012]; Danner-Cantalino v City of New York, 85 AD3d 709, 710 [2011]).
discussed
Cited "see"
Stevens v. Kellar
(2×)
“The doctrine of respondeat superior renders an employer vicariously liable for the tortious acts of its employees only if those acts were committed in furtherance of the employer’s business and within the scope of employment” (Burlarley v Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 75 AD3d 955, 956 [2010] [internal quotation marks and citation omitted]; see Mazzarella v Syracuse Diocese, 100 AD3d 1384, 1385 [2012]; Danner-Cantalino v City of New York, 85 AD3d 709, 710 [2011]).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Health v. Hyland
LLC , 95 AD3d 637, 637 [1st Dept 2012]; see also Mazzarella v Syracuse Diocese [appeal No. 2], 100 AD3d 1384, 1385 [4th Dept 2012]).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
John Mazzarella, Individually and as Father of Four Minor Children of Ages 5, 7, 9 and 11
v.
Syracuse Diocese
v.
Syracuse Diocese
Appeal No. 1.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
Nov 9, 2012.
Cited by 10 opinions | Published
Appeal from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Onondaga County (Brian F. DeJoseph, J.), entered February 28, 2011. The order and judgment directed defendants Syracuse Diocese, Bishop James M. Moynihan and Bishop Thomas J. Costello to produce certain documents for in camera review and otherwise granted the motion of those defendants for a protective order.
It is hereby ordered that said appeal is unanimously dismissed without costs (see Matter of Nugent, 26 AD3d 892, 893 [2006]). Present — Scudder, EJ., Smith, Lindley and Martoche, JJ.