Sween v. Spacemaster Building Systems, LLC

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Sween v. Spacemaster Building Systems, LLC

300 A.D.2d 32, 750 N.Y.S.2d 497, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11713

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

DecidedDecember 5, 2002

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 300 A.D.2d 32 (Sween v. Spacemaster Building Systems, LLC) 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

Sween v. Spacemaster Building Systems, LLC, 300 A.D.2d 32, 750 N.Y.S.2d 497, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11713 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Alan Saks, J.), entered February 20, 2002, which denied defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court properly denied defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint based on the exclusivity provisions of the Workers’ Compensation Law (Workers’ Compensation Law §§ 11, 29 [6]), since the documentary and testimonial evidence support conflicting inferences as to whether plaintiff, at the time of the alleged accident, was, in fact, a special employee of defendant (see Thompson v Grumman Aerospace Corp., 78 NY2d 553, 557). Concur — Williams, P.J., Ellerin, Rubin, Marlow and Gonzalez, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Alan Saks, J.), entered February 20, 2002, which denied defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court properly denied defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint based on the exclusivity provisions of the Workers’ Compensation Law (Workers’ Compensation Law §§ 11, 29 [6]), since the documentary and testimonial evidence support conflicting inferences as to whether plaintiff, at the time of the alleged accident, was, in fact, a special employee of defendant (see Thompson v Grumman Aerospace Corp., 78 NY2d 553, 557). Concur — Williams, P.J., Ellerin, Rubin, Marlow and Gonzalez, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

300 A.D.2d 32, 750 N.Y.S.2d 497, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11713, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sween-v-spacemaster-building-systems-llc-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack