In re Crystal
| Decision Date | 25 May 2017 |
| Citation | 55 N.Y.S.3d 518,150 A.D.3d 1595 |
| Parties | In the Matter of the Claim of Robert A. CRYSTAL, Respondent. Medical Delivery Services, Appellant. Commissioner of Labor, Respondent. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
150 A.D.3d 1595
55 N.Y.S.3d 518
In the Matter of the Claim of Robert A. CRYSTAL, Respondent.
Medical Delivery Services, Appellant.
Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
May 25, 2017.
Peter Fidopiastis, Queensbury, for appellant.
David E. Woodin, Catskill, for Robert A. Crystal, respondent.
Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, New York City (Dawn A. Foshee of counsel), for Commissioner of Labor, respondent.
Before: PETERS, P.J., McCARTHY, EGAN JR., DEVINE and MULVEY, JJ.
PETERS, P.J.
Appeals from two decisions of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed October 28, 2015, which ruled, among other things, that Medical Delivery Services was liable for additional unemployment insurance contributions on remuneration paid to claimant and others similarly situated.
Medical Delivery Services (hereinafter MDS) is a provider of courier services specializing in the transportation of time-sensitive radioactive medications that is regulated by state and federal law. MDS engaged the services of drivers to transport these medications and contracted with Subcontracting Concepts Inc. (hereinafter SCI), a payroll company, to act as the third-party administrator to handle employment-related matters involving the drivers. Claimant responded to an advertisement placed by MDS and, after satisfying necessary requirements, was retained as a driver using his own vehicle. He entered into an owner/operator agreement with SCI in connection therewith. When this work ended, he filed a claim for unemployment insurance benefits. This prompted the Department of Labor to undertake an inquiry to ascertain the nature of the relationship between MDS and claimant, as well as other drivers. The Department concluded that an employment relationship existed and determined that MDS was liable for additional contributions on remuneration paid to claimant and others similarly situated. Following an evidentiary hearing, a Administrative
Law Judge sustained these determinations and the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board ultimately agreed. MDS now appeals.
MDS challenges the Board's assessment of additional contributions based upon its finding of an employment relationship. It is well settled that "[w]hether an employer-employee relationship exists is a question of fact, to be decided on the basis of evidence from which it can be found that the alleged employer exercises control over the results produced ... or the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Xyz Two Way Radio Serv., Inc. v. Comm'r Labor (In re Tsai)
... ... -Commissioner of Labor] , 133 A.D.3d 1156, 1157, 20 N.Y.S.3d 235 [2015], citing Labor Law 620[1][b] ; see also Matter of Crystal [Medical Delivery Servs.-Commissioner of Labor] , 150 A.D.3d 1595, 1597, 55 N.Y.S.3d 518 [2017] ; Matter of Armbruster [Summit Health, Inc. -Commissioner of Labor] , 138 A.D.3d 1367, 1369, 31 N.Y.S.3d 616 [2016], lv dismissed 28 N.Y.3d 946, 38 N.Y.S.3d 514, 60 N.E.3d 409 [2016] ). XYZ's remaining ... ...
-
Park W. Exec. Servs. Inc. v. Comm'r Labor (In re Escoffery)
... ... [TaskRabbit Inc.-Commissioner of Labor], 168 A.D.3d 1323, 1324, 92 N.Y.S.3d 750 [2019] ), and "[w]here some indicia of control is necessitated by regulatory and legal requirements, such indicia will not, standing alone, be sufficient to establish an employment relationship" ( Matter of Crystal [Medical Delivery Servs.-Commissioner of Labor], 150 A.D.3d 1595, 1596, 55 N.Y.S.3d 518 [2017] ; see Matter of Bogart [LaValle Transp., Inc.-Commissioner of Labor], 140 A.D.3d 1217, 12181219, 34 N.Y.S.3d 195 [2016] ). Evidence was presented at the hearing that, once hired, drivers entered into ... ...
-
Med. Delivery Servs. v. Comm'r of Labor (In re Kablan)
... ... Field Delivery Serv. [Roberts], 66 N.Y.2d 516, 521, 498 N.Y.S.2d 111, 488 N.E.2d 1223 [1985] [internal quotation marks, ellipsis and citation omitted]; see Matter of Vega [Postmates Inc.-Commissioner of Labor] , 35 N.Y.3d 131, 137, 125 N.Y.S.3d 640, 149 N.E.3d 401 [2020] ). In Matter of Crystal (Medical Delivery Servs.-Commissioner of Labor ), 150 A.D.3d 1595, 15961597, 55 N.Y.S.3d 518 (2017) and a series of subsequent decisions, this Court affirmed findings by the Board that certain claimants performing similar courier services for MDS, under materially indistinguishable circumstances ... ...
-
Penn Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Comm'r of Labor (In re Thorndike)
... ... We thus find that, even if some of Penn Mutual's control over claimant's performance "was occasioned by the highly regulated nature of the [insurance industry], many other aspects of the control that [Penn Mutual] exercised were not" ( Matter of Crystal [Medical Delivery Servs. -Commissioner of Labor], 150 A.D.3d 1595, 1597, 55 N.Y.S.3d 518 [2017] ; compare Matter of Bogart [LaValle Transp., Inc.-Commissioner of Labor], 140 A.D.3d 1217, 12191220, 34 N.Y.S.3d 195 [2016] ). Penn Mutual's remaining arguments, to the extent not specifically addressed, ... ...