Crean v. Queens Boulevard Tenants Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Crean v. Queens Boulevard Tenants Corp.

252 A.D.2d 352, 675 N.Y.S.2d 533, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7899

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJuly 2, 1998

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 252 A.D.2d 352 (Crean v. Queens Boulevard Tenants Corp.) 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

Crean v. Queens Boulevard Tenants Corp., 252 A.D.2d 352, 675 N.Y.S.2d 533, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7899 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Louise Gruner Gans, J.), entered January 31, 1997, which, in an action by a building employee against the building owner for personal injuries sustained on the job, granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as barred by the exclusivity provisions of the Workers’ Compensation Law, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff will not be heard to assert that his employer was not defendant, but rather the building’s managing agent, having accepted workers’ compensation benefits awarded upon the basis that defendant was plaintiff’s employer (Zabava v 178 E. 78, 212 AD2d 406). In any event, the undisputed evidence that defendant issued and was listed on plaintiff’s W-2s as plaintiff’s employer, that defendant paid plaintiff’s wages, benefits and workers’ compensation insurance, and that plaintiff was injured while making repairs to defendant’s building establishes that plaintiff was, at the least, a “special employee” of defendant at the time of the accident (supra). Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Milonas, Rubin, Williams and Andrias, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Louise Gruner Gans, J.), entered January 31, 1997, which, in an action by a building employee against the building owner for personal injuries sustained on the job, granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as barred by the exclusivity provisions of the Workers’ Compensation Law, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff will not be heard to assert that his employer was not defendant, but rather the building’s managing agent, having accepted workers’ compensation benefits awarded upon the basis that defendant was plaintiff’s employer (Zabava v 178 E. 78, 212 AD2d 406). In any event, the undisputed evidence that defendant issued and was listed on plaintiff’s W-2s as plaintiff’s employer, that defendant paid plaintiff’s wages, benefits and workers’ compensation insurance, and that plaintiff was injured while making repairs to defendant’s building establishes that plaintiff was, at the least, a “special employee” of defendant at the time of the accident (supra). Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Milonas, Rubin, Williams and Andrias, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

252 A.D.2d 352, 675 N.Y.S.2d 533, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7899, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/crean-v-queens-boulevard-tenants-corp-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack