Opinion
March 14, 1997.
Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs, motion denied and complaint reinstated.
Present — Denman, P.J., Green, Balio, Boehm and Fallon, JJ.
Supreme Court erred in dismissing the complaint on the ground that General Municipal Law § 207-c bars a civil action by a police officer against his employer for an intentional tort. "Section 207-c benefits are applied for and determined in a manner identical to Workers' Compensation benefits" ( O'Dette v Parton, 190 AD2d 1074, 1075). "Intentional injuries are not covered by the Workers' Compensation Law, and an employee may bring a tort action for such wrongs against the offending employer" ( Burlew v American Mut. Ins. Co., 63 NY2d 412, 417; see also, Elson v Consolidated Edison Co., 226 AD2d 288; Ferguson v Davis Auto World, 207 AD2d 991; Ralph v Oliver, 186 AD2d 977). We therefore conclude that injuries intentionally inflicted upon a police officer by the employer are not covered by General Municipal Law § 207-c and that the officer may bring an action to recover for such injuries. (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Onondaga County, Nicholson, J. — Dismiss Complaint.)