From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Chung v. Express Tours

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 24, 2000
274 A.D.2d 506 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)

Opinion

Submitted May 17, 2000

July 24, 2000.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Held, J.), dated September 1, 1999, which denied their motion for partial summary judgment dismissing the causes of action asserted by the plaintiffs Jiang Yi Wang and Sandy Liu, and to change the venue of the action from Kings County to Richmond County.

Garbarini Scher, P.C., New York, N.Y. (William D. Buckley and Nancy A. Breslow of counsel), for appellants.

Caesar Napoli, New York, N.Y. (James C. Napoli of counsel), for respondents.

Before: CORNELIUS J. O'BRIEN, J.P., MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, WILLIAM D. FRIEDMANN, LEO F. McGINITY, NANCY E. SMITH, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, the causes of action asserted by the plaintiffs Jiang Yi Wang and Sandy Liu are dismissed, and the action on behalf of the remaining plaintiffs is severed; and it is further,

ORDERED that the Clerk of the Supreme Court, Kings County, is directed to deliver to the Clerk of the Supreme Court, Richmond County, all papers filed in the action and certified copies of all minutes and entries (see, CPLR 511[d]).

The defendants made a prima facie showing that the causes of action asserted by the plaintiff Jiang Yi Wang (hereinafter Wang) and the derivative cause of action asserted by the plaintiff Sandy Liu (hereinafter Liu) are barred by the Workers ' Compensation Law. It was therefore incumbent upon the plaintiffs to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether Wang was working in his capacity as a tour guide for the defendant Express Tours, Inc. (hereinafter Express), and whether Express had obtained Workers' Compensation insurance coverage for him. The affirmation submitted by the plaintiffs' attorney in opposition to the motion was devoid of any evidentiary value and failed to raise a triable issue of fact (see, Zuckerman v. City of New York, 49 N.Y.2d 557). Since the Supreme Court should have granted partial summary judgment dismissing the causes of action asserted by Wang and Liu, the venue of the action should be transferred to Richmond County, the county of residence of the only remaining plaintiff who resides in the State of New York (see, Tamburro v. International Bus. Machs. Corp., 234 A.D.2d 535).


Summaries of

Chung v. Express Tours

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 24, 2000
274 A.D.2d 506 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
Case details for

Chung v. Express Tours

Case Details

Full title:MING-LIANG PHILIP CHUNG, ET AL., RESPONDENTS, v. EXPRESS TOURS, INC., ET…

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

Date published: Jul 24, 2000

Citations

274 A.D.2d 506 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
715 N.Y.S.2d 417

Citing Cases

Bonilla v. Tishman Interiors Corp.

In an order dated March 4, 2011, the Supreme Court, Kings County, granted the motion of the defendant M & A…