Rosa v. Quarry Crotona Homes, Inc.

239 A.D.2d 273, 658 N.Y.S.2d 19, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5434
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided May 22, 1997·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Luis Gonzalez, J.), entered June 18, 1996, which, in an action by a laborer to recover for personal injuries, insofar as appealed, denied defendant-appellant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as barred by the exclusivity provisions of the Workers’ Compensation Law, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

[274] The motion court correctly held that because defendant-appellant was named in the Workers’ Compensation Board proceeding and specifically argued therein, through counsel, that it was plaintiff’s employer, it should be collaterally estopped from arguing herein that it was plaintiff’s "co-employer” by reason of its alter ego relationship with the company found by the Board to be plaintiff’s employer (see, Vogel v Herk El. Co., 229 AD2d 331). Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Milonas, Ellerin, Tom and Mazzarelli, JJ.

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

Rosa v. Quarry Crotona Homes, Inc., 239 A.D.2d 273, 658 N.Y.S.2d 19, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5434 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

239 A.D.2d 273 (Rosa v. Quarry Crotona Homes, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Guaman v. 1963 Ryer Realty Corp.
127 A.D.3d 454 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)