Matter of Rambally v. Greenberg

• Decision Date: 06 January 2005
• Docket Number: 95256.
• Citation: 14 A.D.3d 742,788 N.Y.S.2d 225,2005 NY Slip Op 00041
• Parties: In the Matter of BASDEO RAMBALLY, Respondent, v. FRED GREENBERG, Appellant. WORKERS' COMPENSATION BOARD, Respondent.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

14 A.D.3d 742

788 N.Y.S.2d 225

2005 NY Slip Op 00041

In the Matter of BASDEO RAMBALLY, Respondent, v. FRED GREENBERG, Appellant WORKERS' COMPENSATION BOARD, Respondent.

95256.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Third Department.

January 6, 2005.

Appeal from a decision of the Workers' Compensation Board, filed November 3, 2003, which denied the employer's application for reconsideration and/or full Board review of a prior decision ruling, inter alia, that claimant was an employee of Fred Greenberg and awarded him workers' compensation benefits.

LAHTINEN, J.

Claimant, a housekeeper, suffered a work-related injury to his back in February 1995 while cleaning a hotel. He applied for workers' compensation benefits citing "Twenty-Twenty Hotel Ser[vice]," a corporation formed after his injury, as his employer and listing Fred Greenberg as the employer or supervisor notified of his injury. Accordingly, a question arose concerning the identity of claimant's employer and several hearings were held to resolve the issue. Greenberg, who was the principal of 20-20 Drapery and Upholstery, Inc., a company which was dissolved before claimant's injury, was notified of the hearings but failed to appear. He did, however, send a letter to the Workers' Compensation Board stating that claimant was never employed by him or any of his companies. Jurisdiction was established over Greenberg by an alternative method of service.

At a January 2002 hearing before a Workers' Compensation Law Judge (hereinafter WCLJ), claimant testified that he was employed by Greenberg when he injured his back while moving a file cabinet. He stated that he worked approximately eight hours a day, four to six days a week, and that Greenberg paid him cash at the work site. Greenberg failed to appear at the hearing and the WCLJ ruled, among other things, that claimant was an employee of Greenberg and that Greenberg was uninsured on the date of the injury. A timely application for Board review of the WCLJ's decision was made by Greenberg. By decision filed November 4, 2002, the Board affirmed the WCLJ's decision and closed the case. Some nine months later, Greenberg sought reconsideration and/or full Board review of this decision claiming that he never received the November 4, 2002 decision because it was apparently mailed to an old address he had not used in over 10 years. His application was denied and this appeal ensued.

Inasmuch as Greenberg is appealing only from the Board's denial of his application for...