Santiago v. Dedvukaj
| Decision Date | 26 November 1990 |
| Citation | 562 N.Y.S.2d 200,167 A.D.2d 529 |
| Parties | Norberto SANTIAGO, Appellant, v. Gjelosh DEDVUKAJ, Respondent. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Nason & Cohen, P.C., New York City (Herbert Nason and Lawrence B. Lame, of counsel), for appellant.
Peter F. Broderick, New York City (Kevin J. Barry, of counsel), for respondent.
Before HARWOOD, J.P., and BALLETTA, MILLER and O'BRIEN, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Kings County (G. Aronin, J.), dated May 1, 1989, which granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment on the ground that the action was barred by the Workers' Compensation Law, and denied the plaintiff's cross motion to dismiss the defendant's affirmative defense that workers' compensation coverage was the plaintiff's exclusive remedy.
ORDERED that the order and judgment is affirmed, with costs.
It is well settled that controversies regarding the applicability of the Workers' Compensation Law rest within the primary jurisdiction of the Workers' Compensation Board (see, Botwinick v. Ogden, 59 N.Y.2d 909, 466 N.Y.S.2d 291, 453 N.E.2d 520; O'Rourke v. Long, 41 N.Y.2d 219, 391 N.Y.S.2d 553, 359 N.E.2d 1347; Becker v. Clarkstown Cent. School Dist., 157 A.D.2d 641, 549 N.Y.S.2d 739), including issues as to the existence of an employer-employee relationship (see, Calhoun v. Big Apple Wrecking Corp., 162 A.D.2d 574, 557 N.Y.S.2d 90). In the instant case, the Workers' Compensation Board determined that the plaintiff was the employee of Hoti Realty Management Company, and that he was injured during the course of his employment. The plaintiff was accordingly awarded Workers' Compensation benefits. This determination was final and binding (see, O'Connor v. Midiria, 55 N.Y.2d 538, 450 N.Y.S.2d 455, 435 N.E.2d 1070; Calhoun v. Big Apple Wrecking Corp., supra ), and, thus, the plaintiff may not maintain the instant action against the defendant proprietor of Hoti Realty Management Company and his fellow servant (see, Workers' Compensation Law § 29[6], by arguing that he was in fact employed by an altogether different commercial entity.
We have reviewed the plaintiff's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Derosas v. Rosmarins Land Holdings, LLC, 2015-02838, Index No. 285/13.
...relationship’ " (Maropakis v. Stillwell Materials Corp., 38 A.D.3d 623, 623, 833 N.Y.S.2d 122, quoting Santiago v. Dedvukaj, 167 A.D.2d 529, 529, 562 N.Y.S.2d 200 ). "The determination of the Workers' Compensation Board is final and binding, and a plaintiff may not maintain an action agains......
-
Paguay v. Cup of Tea, LLC
...jurisdiction of the ... Board, including issues as to the existence of an employer-employee relationship" ( Santiago v. Dedvukaj, 167 A.D.2d 529, 529, 562 N.Y.S.2d 200 ; see Derosas v. Rosmarins Land Holdings, LLC, 148 A.D.3d at 989, 50 N.Y.S.3d 124 ; Maropakis v. Stillwell Materials Corp.,......
-
Ramos v. Baker
...Power Corp., 86 A.D.3d 682, 683–684, 926 N.Y.S.2d 224; Dupkanicova v. James, 17 A.D.3d 627, 628, 793 N.Y.S.2d 512; Santiago v. Dedvukaj, 167 A.D.2d 529, 562 N.Y.S.2d 200; Calhoun v. Big Apple Wrecking Corp., 162 A.D.2d 574, 575, 557 N.Y.S.2d 90). To succeed on a claim under Labor Law § 200 ......
-
Velazquez-Guadalupe v. Ideal Builders & Constr. Servs.
...to the existence of an employer-employee relationship'" (Maropakis v Stillwell Materials Corp., 38 A.D.3d 623, 623, quoting Santiago v Dedvukaj, 167 A.D.2d 529, 529). evidence concerning whether CDW may invoke the common-law doctrine of collateral estoppel is inapposite, since CDW's entitle......