Skip to main content

Kaczorowski v. Black & Adams

N.Y. App. Div.April 18, 2002Cited 9 times
Defendant WinBlack & Adams
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

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

Breach of Contract

Outcome

The appellate court affirmed the lower court's denial of the defendant's motion to dismiss, allowing the plaintiff's lawsuit for unpaid legal services to proceed against the defendant in New York courts.

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 was an employment law case called Kaczorowski v. Black & Adams from 2002, but without the court's written decision or case facts, I cannot explain: - What workplace dispute occurred between the parties - What legal issues were involved - How the court ruled - What reasoning the court used 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 judge's decision and reasoning. If you have the full court decision or a more detailed excerpt from this case, I'd be happy to summarize it in plain English to help workers understand how it might affect their rights or workplace situations. For now, I can only confirm this was an employment law dispute that reached the appellate level in New York in 2002, but the specific details and outcome remain unclear from the limited information provided.

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.