Villatoro v. Grand Boulevard Realty, Inc., 2004-08910.
| Decision Date | 16 May 2005 |
| Docket Number | 2004-08910. |
| Citation | 18 A.D.3d 647,2005 NY Slip Op 04029,795 N.Y.S.2d 637 |
| Parties | JOSE VILLATORO, Respondent, v. GRAND BOULEVARD REALTY, INC., Defendant, and POPEI'S CLAM BAR LTD. OF DEER PARK, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, the complaint is dismissed insofar as asserted against the appellant, and the action against the remaining defendant is severed.
Contrary to the holding of the Supreme Court, "[w]orkers' compensation is an exclusive remedy as a matter of substantive law, and where it appears that the plaintiff was an employee of the defendant, the obligation of alleging and proving noncoverage falls upon the plaintiff" (Rainey v Jefferson Vil. Condo No. 11 Assoc., 203 AD2d 544, 546 [1994]; see Murray v City of New York, 43 NY2d 400, 407 [1977]; O'Rourke v Long, 41 NY2d 219, 226 [1976]; Heifetz v Metropolitan Jewish Geriatric Ctr., 135 AD2d 498, 500 [1987]; Gyory v Radgowski, 89 AD2d 867, 869 [1982]). The appellant established its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law through deposition testimony that the plaintiff was an employee covered by workers' compensation insurance. In opposition, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Santos v. Butkovich
...on the plaintiff” (Murray v. City of New York, 43 N.Y.2d 400, 407, 401 N.Y.S.2d 773, 372 N.E.2d 560 ; see Villatoro v. Grand Blvd. Realty, Inc., 18 A.D.3d 647, 647, 795 N.Y.S.2d 637 ; Rainey v. Jefferson Vil. Condo No. 11 Assoc., 203 A.D.2d 544, 546, 611 N.Y.S.2d 207 ). Here, in support of ......
-
Rodriguez v. King Kullen Gricery Co.
...noncoverage falls on the plaintiff" (Murray v City of New York, 43 N.Y.2d 400, 407 [1977]; see Villatoro v Grand Blvd. Realty, Inc., 18 A.D.3d 647, 647 [2d Dept 2005]; Rainey v Jefferson Vil. Condo No. 11 Assoc., 203 A.D.2d 544, 546 [2d Dept 1994]). Here, in support of their motion for summ......
-
Vargas v. Crown Container Co.
...283;Beaucejour v. General Linen Supply & Laundry Co., Inc., 39 A.D.3d 444, 444, 833 N.Y.S.2d 228;Villatoro v. Grand Blvd. Realty, Inc., 18 A.D.3d 647, 647–648, 795 N.Y.S.2d 637;Hernandez v. Yonkers Contr. Co., 292 A.D.2d 422, 424, 739 N.Y.S.2d 723;Kuznetz v. County of Nassau, 229 A.D.2d 476......
-
Vitello v. Amboy Bus Co.
...insurance for its subsidiary. In opposition, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact ( see Villatoro v. Grand Blvd. Realty, Inc., 18 A.D.3d 647, 795 N.Y.S.2d 637). Accordingly, the Supreme Court should have granted that branch of the defendant's motion which was for summary ju......