Case Name: ALBERTA BOYLE, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. CHARLES J. BREME, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT
Court: Supreme Court of New Jersey
Jurisdiction: New Jersey
Decision Date: 1983-07-14
Citations: 93 N.J. 569
Docket Number: 
Parties: ALBERTA BOYLE, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. CHARLES J. BREME, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.
Judges: 
Reporter: New Jersey Reports
Volume: 93
Pages: 569–577

Head Matter:
ALBERTA BOYLE, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. CHARLES J. BREME, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.
Argued March 21, 1983
Decided July 14, 1983.
Joseph Asbell argued the cause for appellant (Joseph Asbell, attorney; Yale I. Asbell, on the briefs).
John R. Gercke, Asst. County Counsel, argued the cause for respondent (Steven D. Weinstein, Camden County Counsel, attorney).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
We affirm for the reasons stated by Judge Fritz in his opinion below. 187 N.J.Super. 129 (App.Div.1982). We note that when the Legislature added a provision for co-employee immunity to the Workers' Compensation Act in 1961, L.1961, c. 2 (codified at N.J.S.A. 34:15-8), some employers had medical clinics staffed by employee doctors and nurses. If the Legislature had intended to exclude this class of co-employees, it could have expressed that intent. Indeed the Legislature made a comprehensive review of the Act in 1979, L.1979, c. 283, without modifying the co-employee immunity provision despite the pronouncement in Bergen v. Miller, 104 N.J.Super. 350 (App.Div.), certif. denied, 53 N.J. 582 (1969), of the principle enunciated in this case. The employee's recovery under the Act includes, of course, the consequences of malpractice, the injuries being deemed to arise out of and in the course of employment. Flanagan v. Charles E. Green & Son, 122 N.J.L. 424 (E. & A. 1939).
For affirmance — Chief Justice WILENTZ, and Justices CLIFFORD, SCHREIBER, POLLOCK, O'HERN and GARIBALDI — 6.
For reversal —Judge HANDLER — 1.