Plaintiff's pinky and ring fingers, although completely amputated in the underlying workplace accident, were shortly after the accident surgically reattached so that plaintiff regained their use, at least partially. Accordingly, because the fingers and their use were not permanently and totally lost, plaintiff did not sustain a "grave injury" within the meaning of Workers' Compensation Law § 11 (see Castro v United Container Mach. Group, Inc.,
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Let's get started
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
VINCENTY v. CINCINNATI INC.
14 A.D.3d 392 (2005)
788 N.Y.S.2d 92
ELVIN VINCENTY, Respondent, v. CINCINNATI INCORPORATED, Respondent, and ABCO FIRE DOOR COMPANY, INC., Appellant, et al., Defendant. CINCINNATI INCORPORATED, Third-Party Plaintiff-Respondent, v. ABCO DOOR INDUSTRIES, INC., Third-Party Defendant-Appellant-Respondent.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
January 13, 2005.
January 13, 2005.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
Cited Cases
- No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.
