Alfonso v. Lopez
| Citation | 149 A.D.3d 1535,52 N.Y.S.3d 780 |
| Parties | Carlos M. SUAREZ ALFONSO, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. Edwin R. LOPEZ, et al., Defendants, and United Parcel Service, Inc., Defendant–Respondent. |
| Decision Date | 28 April 2017 |
| Court | New York Supreme Court Appellate Division |
149 A.D.3d 1535
52 N.Y.S.3d 780
Carlos M. SUAREZ ALFONSO, Plaintiff–Appellant,
v.
Edwin R. LOPEZ, et al., Defendants,
and
United Parcel Service, Inc., Defendant–Respondent.
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
April 28, 2017.
Smith, Sovik, Kendrick & Sugnet, P.C., Syracuse (Steven Williams of Counsel), for Plaintiff–Appellant.
Ansa Assuncao, LLP, White Plains (Thomas O. O'Connor of Counsel), for Defendant–Respondent.
PRESENT: CENTRA, J.P., CARNI, LINDLEY, CURRAN, AND TROUTMAN, JJ.
MEMORANDUM:
Plaintiff commenced this action seeking damages for injuries he allegedly sustained in an accident that occurred while he was working on the premises of United Parcel Service, Inc. (defendant). Plaintiff alleged that he was hired by a nonparty to this action to perform work at defendant's facility.
After the accident, however, plaintiff filed a workers' compensation claim that listed defendant as his employer, and the Workers' Compensation Board (Board) issued five decisions that listed defendant as plaintiff's employer and ordered that defendant pay benefits to plaintiff. In lieu of answering, defendant moved to dismiss the complaint against it on the ground that plaintiff's claims are barred by the Workers' Compensation Law. Supreme Court granted the motion, and we affirm.
The Court of Appeals has long held that, "as to an employer, where workmen's compensation provides a remedy, the remedy that it provides, save for the rare case, is exclusive. Where liability is imposed upon an employer to provide workmen's compensation and compensation is provided, that liability is exclusive and in the stead of any other employer liability whatsoever" (O'Rourke v. Long, 41 N.Y.2d 219, 221, 391 N.Y.S.2d 553, 359 N.E.2d 1347 ; see Weiner v. City of New York, 19 N.Y.3d 852, 854, 947 N.Y.S.2d 404, 970 N.E.2d 427 ; O'Connor v. Midiria, 55 N.Y.2d 538, 540–541, 450 N.Y.S.2d 455, 435 N.E.2d 1070 ). When there are questions of fact concerning the availability of workers' compensation benefits, " ‘the plaintiff may not choose...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Timperio v. Bronx-Lebanon Hosp.
...[2016] ; see Cunningham v. State of New York, 60 N.Y.2d 248, 252, 469 N.Y.S.2d 588, 457 N.E.2d 693 [1983] ; Alfonso v. Lopez, 149 A.D.3d 1535, 1536, 52 N.Y.S.3d 780 [2017] ). Moreover, we reject Timperio's contention that the Board was collaterally estopped or otherwise precluded from adjud......
-
Timperio v. Bronx-Lebanon Hosp.
... ... 910 [2016]; see Cunningham v State of New York, 60 ... N.Y.2d 248, 252 [1983]; Alfonso v Lopez, 149 A.D.3d ... 1535, 1536 [2017]) ... Moreover, ... we reject Timperio's contention that the Board was ... ...
-
Chiloyan v. Chiloyan
...of fact to be resolved by the Board" ( Owens v. Jea Bus Co., Inc., 161 A.D.3d 1188, 1189, 77 N.Y.S.3d 141 ; see Alfonso v. Lopez, 149 A.D.3d 1535, 1536, 52 N.Y.S.3d 780 ; Matter of Saratoga Skydiving Adventures v. Workers' Compensation Bd., 145 A.D.3d 1333, 1334, 42 N.Y.S.3d 696 ). The find......
-
Owens v. Jea Bus Co.
...as an employee of a defendant at the time of the injury is a question of fact to be resolved by the Board (see Alfonso v. Lopez, 149 A.D.3d 1535, 1536, 52 N.Y.S.3d 780 ; Matter of Saratoga Skydiving Adventures v. Workers' Compensation Bd. , 145 A.D.3d 1333, 1334, 42 N.Y.S.3d 696 ; Matter of......