From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Dirienzo v. James McCullagh

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 24, 2009
59 A.D.3d 308 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)

Opinion

No. 5339 22344/05.

February 24, 2009.

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Alan Saks, J.), entered October 4, 2007, which, insofar as appealed from as limited by the briefs, denied defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Morenus, Conway, Goren Brandman, Melville (Christopher M. Lochner of counsel), for appellants.

Alexander J. Wulwick, New York, for respondent.

Before: Gonzalez, J.P., Sweeny, Renwick and Freedman, JJ.


The denial of defendants' summary judgment motion, which was brought prior to any discovery being conducted, was appropriate. Although defendants submitted certain documents purporting to demonstrate that they were not liable under the Labor Law for plaintiff's injuries, the documents raised a number of issues of fact concerning, inter alia, the relationship among various corporate entities and those entities' presence at the subject work site. Under the circumstances, plaintiff is entitled to discovery to resolve such outstanding questions ( see e.g. Primedia Inc. v SBI USA LLC, 43 AD3d 685, 686; see also La v New York Infirmary/Beekman Downtown Hosp., 214 AD2d 425).


Summaries of

Dirienzo v. James McCullagh

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 24, 2009
59 A.D.3d 308 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)
Case details for

Dirienzo v. James McCullagh

Case Details

Full title:MICHAEL DIRIENZO, Respondent, v. JAMES MCCULLAGH OF NEW YORK, INC., et…

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

Date published: Feb 24, 2009

Citations

59 A.D.3d 308 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)
2009 N.Y. Slip Op. 1354
873 N.Y.S.2d 305