Opinion
1692
September 30, 2003.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward Lehner, J.), entered August 1, 2002, which, inter alia, granted defendant's cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Wayne M. Rubin, for plaintiff-appellant.
John V. Fabiani, for plaintiff-respondent.
Kimberly A. Ricciardi, for third-party defendant-respondent.
Before: Tom, J.P., Sullivan, Rosenberger, Lerner, Friedman, JJ.
Inasmuch as the record discloses that defendant was, at all relevant times, directly responsible for supervising, directing and controlling plaintiff's work, the motion court properly concluded, as a matter of law, that plaintiff was a special employee of defendant and, accordingly, that he is barred from maintaining this action (see Workers' Compensation Law § 11 and § 29; Thompson v. Grumman Aerospace Corp., 78 N.Y.2d 553, 557-558; Brunetti v. City of New York, 286 A.D.2d 253, 254; Gannon v. JWP Forest Elec. Corp., 275 A.D.2d 231, 232; and see Camelli v. Pace Univ., 131 A.D.2d 419).
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.