Case Name: Roseanne Seebeck et al., Appellants, v. William Finetta, Respondent. (And a Third-Party Action.)
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1992-01-27
Citations: 179 A.D.2d 805
Docket Number: 
Parties: Roseanne Seebeck et al., Appellants, v William Finetta, Respondent. (And a Third-Party Action.)
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 179
Pages: 805–805

Head Matter:
Roseanne Seebeck et al., Appellants, v William Finetta, Respondent. (And a Third-Party Action.)

Opinion:
The plaintiff Roseanne Seebeck and the defendant, coemployees, were both acting in the course of their mutual employment when the defendant's automobile struck Roseanne (see, Matter of Husted v Seneca Steel Serv., 41 NY2d 140; Kunze v Jones, 6 AD2d 888, affd 8 NY2d 1152; Smithline v Ghessi, 25 AD2d 841; Pantolo v Lane, 185 Misc 221). Summary judgment was properly granted in favor of the defendant since workers' compensation is the exclusive remedy available to the injured plaintiff (see, Workers' Compensation Law § 29 [6]). Mangano, P. J., Bracken, Lawrence and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.