Bernick v. Cigna Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Bernick v. Cigna Corp.

112 A.D.2d 45, 490 N.Y.S.2d 1017, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 50693

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided June 4, 1985·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Order unanimously reversed, on the law, with costs, and motion granted. Memorandum: Defendant’s motion to dismiss plaintiff’s complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (1), (7) should have been granted. Plaintiff failed to show that the activities of defendant, the parent corporation of plaintiff’s employer, sufficiently dominated the employer to make the parent a proper defendant (Musman v Modern Deb, 50 AD2d 761). (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Erie County, McGowan, J. — dismiss complaint.) Present — Doerr, J. P., Boomer, O’Donnell, Pine and Schnepp, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Order unanimously reversed, on the law, with costs, and motion granted. Memorandum: Defendant’s motion to dismiss plaintiff’s complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (1), (7) should have been granted. Plaintiff failed to show that the activities of defendant, the parent corporation of plaintiff’s employer, sufficiently dominated the employer to make the parent a proper defendant (Musman v Modern Deb, 50 AD2d 761). (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Erie County, McGowan, J. — dismiss complaint.) Present — Doerr, J. P., Boomer, O’Donnell, Pine and Schnepp, JJ.

Bernick v. Cigna Corp., 112 A.D.2d 45, 490 N.Y.S.2d 1017, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 50693 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

112 A.D.2d 45 (Bernick v. Cigna Corp.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related