Skip to main content

Scofield v. Trustees of Union College

N.Y. App. Div.November 29, 2001Cited 21 times
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s)
Peters
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
appeal

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

Wrongful Termination

Outcome

The appellate court affirmed summary judgment dismissing all claims against the employer defendants. The court found that the hazardous condition (crushed stones) was readily observable to the plaintiff and that the cited Industrial Code provisions did not apply to the work area.

What This Ruling Means

I apologize, but I cannot provide a meaningful summary of this court ruling because the excerpt you've provided doesn't contain the actual case details or court decision. The information shows this is an employment law case called Scofield v. Trustees of Union College from a New York appellate court in 2001, but without the court's written opinion or case facts, I cannot explain: - What specific employment dispute occurred between Scofield and Union College - What legal issues were involved - How the court ruled - The reasoning behind the decision To write an accurate summary for workers, I would need access to the actual court opinion that explains the facts of the case, the legal arguments made by both sides, and the court's analysis and conclusion. If you can provide the full court opinion or case excerpt with the substantive details, I'd be happy to summarize it in plain English and explain what it means for workers' rights and employment law.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.