Judge David larimer
Baxter was hurt at work in May 2008, as a result of defendants’ allegedly defective saw. On May 21, he received compensation from Guard Insurance Group. He never sued defendants, and the one-year period to do so under New York Worker’s Compensation Law §29 expired May 15, 2009. Guard’s Sept. 23, 2009, letter to Baxter purportedly satisfied its notice obligations under §29(2). It asserted automatic assignment of Baxter’s claims on Oct. 23. Distinguishing Sclafani v. Eastman Kodak and In re Matzner, district court denied dismissal of Guard’s May 11, 2011, suit seeking reimbursement for its payments to Baxter. Guard’s Sept. 23 letter met its notice obligations under §29(2). It notified Baxter of his right to sue third parties, and notified him that if he did not intend to file a third party action, Guard intended to exercise its right to do so. The letter correctly summarized Baxter’s and Guard’s rights under §29, explicitly referenced §29(2), and called Baxter’s attention to the statute of limitations. The letter validly assigned Baxter’s claims to Guard. Having satisfied the Worker’s Compensation Law’s requirements, Guard properly commenced suit for reimbursement on account of defendants’ alleged negligence.
