Clarke v. Americana House, Inc.

186 A.D.2d 531, 588 N.Y.S.2d 353, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11074
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedOctober 5, 1992
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 186 A.D.2d 531 (Clarke v. Americana House, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Clarke v. Americana House, Inc., 186 A.D.2d 531, 588 N.Y.S.2d 353, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11074 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Opinion

— In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Kutner, J.), dated July 27, 1990, which granted the motion of the individual defendants Warren James Oelsner and Carol Oelsner for partial summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as it is asserted against them.

Ordered that on the court’s own motion, Katherine H. Clarke, as Administratrix of the Estate of William N. Clarke, is substituted as the party plaintiff, and the caption is amended accordingly; and it is further,

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly granted the defendants Warren Oelsner and Carol Oelsner summary judgment. A worker injured during the course of the worker’s employment cannot maintain an action to recover damages for personal injuries against the owners of premises upon which an accident occurred when, as here, those owners are also officers of the corporation which employed the worker (see, Heritage v Van Patten, 59 NY2d 1017; Ozarowski v Yaloz Realty Corp., 181 AD2d 763; Roll v Murphy, 174 AD2d 1030; Owens v Hirth, 166 [532]*532AD2d 244; St. Andrews v Lucarelli, 115 AD2d 155). The Workers’ Compensation award which the plaintiffs decedent applied for and received is his exclusive remedy (see, Workers’ Compensation Law §29 [6]). Regardless of their status as owners of the premises where the injury occurred, the respondents remain coemployees with the plaintiff in all matters arising from and connected to their common employment (see, Heritage v Van Patten, supra). Harwood, J. P., Balletta, Rosenblatt and Santucci, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Ortega v. 669 Meeker Ave., LLC
2021 NY Slip Op 00570 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2021)
Stephan v. Stein
226 A.D.2d 364 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1996)
Kupke v. Mullane
215 A.D.2d 531 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1995)
McFarlane v. Chera
211 A.D.2d 764 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1995)
Druiett v. Brenner
193 A.D.2d 644 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1993)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
186 A.D.2d 531, 588 N.Y.S.2d 353, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11074, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/clarke-v-americana-house-inc-nyappdiv-1992.