From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Brown v. Christopher Street Owners Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 8, 1998
256 A.D.2d 78 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

December 8, 1998

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Sheila Abdus-Salaam, J.).


Defendants were granted summary judgment dismissing plaintiffs complaint in its entirety on January 10, 1995 ( Brown v. Christopher St. Owners Corp., 211 A.D.2d 441). The Court of Appeals affirmed, noting that the parties had not addressed the dismissal of plaintiffs claim under Labor Law § 202 Lab. ( Brown v. Christopher St. Owners Corp., 87 N.Y.2d 938). Plaintiff's subsequent action under Labor Law § 202 Lab. was properly dismissed on res judicata grounds because the second action arose out of the same transaction ( see, O'Brien v. City of Syracuse, 54 N.Y.2d 353, 357-358; Thomas v. City of New York, 239 A.D.2d 180; Brooklyn Welding Corp. v. City of New York, 198 A.D.2d 189, lv dismissed 83 N.Y.2d 795) and the earlier grant of summary judgment to defendants resulted in a final judgment on the merits ( see, Collins v. Bertram Yacht Corp., 42 N.Y.2d 1033; Vinci v. Northside Partnership, 250 AID2d 965).

Concur — Milonas, J. P., Nardelli, Williams, Tom and Andrias, JJ.


Summaries of

Brown v. Christopher Street Owners Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 8, 1998
256 A.D.2d 78 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

Brown v. Christopher Street Owners Corp.

Case Details

Full title:ARTHUR BROWN, Appellant, v. CHRISTOPHER STREET OWNERS CORP. et al.…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Dec 8, 1998

Citations

256 A.D.2d 78 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
681 N.Y.S.2d 255

Citing Cases

Tolk v. 11 W. 42 Realty Inv'rs

As a preliminary matter, AFR points out that Tolk has no direct cause of action against it, and since Tolk's…