Carty v. East 175th St. Hous. Dev. Fund Corp..
Decision Date | 19 April 2011 |
Citation | 921 N.Y.S.2d 237,2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 03111,83 A.D.3d 529 |
Parties | Chesney CARTY, Plaintiff–Appellant,v.EAST 175TH STREET HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FUND CORPORATION, Defendant–Respondent. |
Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Pollack, Pollack, Isaac & De Cicco, New York (Brian J. Isaac of counsel), for appellant.Fumuso, Kelly, DeVerna, Snyder, Swart & Farrell, LLP, Hauppauge (Scott G. Christesen of counsel), for respondent.TOM, J.P., MAZZARELLI, ACOSTA, RENWICK, FREEDMAN, JJ.
Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Mary Ann Brigantti–Hughes, J.), entered March 12, 2010, which granted defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Since plaintiff's employer and defendant functioned as one company, plaintiff's claims against defendant are barred by Workers' Compensation Law § 11 ( see Hernandez v. Sanchez, 40 A.D.3d 446, 836 N.Y.S.2d 577 [2007]; Ramnarine v. Memorial Ctr. for Cancer & Allied Diseases, 281 A.D.2d 218, 722 N.Y.S.2d 493 [2001]; Anduaga v. AHRC NYC New Projects, Inc., 57 A.D.3d 925, 869 N.Y.S.2d 801 [2008], lv. denied 12 N.Y.3d 707, 879 N.Y.S.2d 53, 906 N.E.2d 1087 [2009] ). The record demonstrates that, while the two entities have separate certificates of incorporation, they share a president and director of finance, financial management, administrative headquarters, an insurance policy, and a common purpose. Moreover, plaintiff's employer is a permanent member of defendant, defendant owns the building in which plaintiff was injured, and has no employees, while plaintiff's employer pays all the building's operating expenses and has employees to operate the facility.
We have considered plaintiff's remaining contentions and find them unavailing.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Fuller v. KFG Land I, LLC, 12350
...in situations where the plaintiff's employer and the defendant have functioned as one company ( Carty v. East 175th St. Hous. Dev. Fund Corp., 83 A.D.3d 529, 921 N.Y.S.2d 237 [1st Dept. 2011] ). In those circumstances, two or more companies function much as joint venturers ( Carty v. E. 175......
-
Buchwald v. 1307 Porterville Rd., LLC
...; Amill v. Lawrence Ruben Co., Inc., 100 A.D.3d 458, 459, 954 N.Y.S.2d 27 [1st Dept. 2012] ; Carty v. East 175th St. Hous. Dev. Fund Corp., 83 A.D.3d 529, 529, 921 N.Y.S.2d 237 [1st Dept. 2011] ; Lee v. Arnan Dev. Corp., 77 A.D.3d 1261, 1262–1263, 909 N.Y.S.2d 826 [3d Dept. 2010] ; Samuel v......
-
Kittay v. Moskowitz
...exclusive remedy against HRI is the Workers' Compensation Law ( seeWorkers' Compensation Law § 11; ICarty v. East 175th St. Hous. Dev. Fund Corp., 83 A.D.3d 529, 921 N.Y.S.2d 237 [2011];Morato–Rodriguez v. Riva Const. Group, Inc., 88 A.D.3d 549, 931 N.Y.S.2d 282 [2011];Hernandez v. Sanchez,......
-
Ciapa v. Misso
...Law § 11 ( see Sulecki v. City of New York, 74 A.D.3d 454, 454–455, 900 N.Y.S.2d 877;see also Carty v. East 175th St. Hous. Dev. Fund Corp., 83 A.D.3d 529, 529, 921 N.Y.S.2d 237;Diaz, 298 A.D.2d at 548, 749 N.Y.S.2d 46;cf. Palmer v. Dezer Props. II, 270 A.D.2d 207, 207, 706 N.Y.S.2d 31,lv. ......