Richins v. Quick Change Artistry, LLC

• Decision Date: 27 June 2013
• Citation: 2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 04862,107 A.D.3d 1342,968 N.Y.S.2d 680
• Parties: In the Matter of the Claim of Gregory S. RICHINS, Respondent. v. QUICK CHANGE ARTISTRY, LLC, Appellant. Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

107 A.D.3d 1342
968 N.Y.S.2d 680
2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 04862

In the Matter of the Claim of Gregory S. RICHINS, Respondent.
v.
QUICK CHANGE ARTISTRY, LLC, Appellant.
Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.

June 27, 2013.

[968 N.Y.S.2d 681]

Littler Mendelson, PC, New York City (Stephen A. Fuchs of counsel), for appellant.

Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, New York City (Mary Hughes of counsel), for Commissioner of Labor, respondent.

Before: PETERS, P.J., ROSE, STEIN and GARRY, JJ.

STEIN, J.

[107 A.D.3d 1343]Appeals from two decisions of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed November 30, 2011, which ruled, among other things, that Quick Change Artistry, LLC was liable for unemployment insurance contributions based on remuneration paid to claimant and others similarly situated.

Quick Change Artistry, LLC is in the business of booking backstage support staff—i.e., dressers, pressers, pinners and tailors—for designers and producers of fashion shows. Claimant was engaged by Quick Change to render services as a pinner for one week in November 2008 and one day in December 2008. When claimant filed a claim for unemployment insurance benefits with regard to separate employment, his work in conjunction with Quick Change came to light. The Department of Labor subsequently issued an initial determination finding claimant eligible to receive benefits and Quick Change liable for contributions based upon remuneration paid to claimant and others similarly situated. After an objection by Quick Change, an Administrative Law Judge ruled that claimant was an employee for the purpose of unemployment insurance. Upon review, the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board affirmed these decisions. ¹ Quick Change now appeals.

We reverse. The determination as to whether an employment relationship exists “turns upon the control exercised by the employer over the results produced or the means used to obtain those results, with control over the latter being the more important factor to consider” ( Matter of Holleran [Jez Enters., Inc.–Commissioner of Labor], 98 A.D.3d 757, 758, 950 N.Y.S.2d 205 [2012];see Matter of Empire State Towing & Recovery Assn., Inc. [Commissioner of Labor], 15 N.Y.3d 433, 437, 912 N.Y.S.2d 551, 938 N.E.2d 984 [2010];

[968 N.Y.S.2d 682]

Matter of Best [Lusignan–Commissioner of Labor], 95 A.D.3d 1536, 1537, 944 N.Y.S.2d 783 [2012];Matter of Interlandi [Cremosa Foods Co., LLC–Commissioner of Labor],...