From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

DeJesus v. Todaro

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 18, 2003
2 A.D.3d 282 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

2528.

Decided December 18, 2003.

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Howard Silver, J.), entered January 28, 2003, which, in an action for personal injuries sustained by a worker on premises leased to his employer H.T. Sales Company, Inc. (HT Co.) and owned at the time of the accident either by the individual defendant-appellant (Todaro) or the corporate defendant-appellant (Todaro Properties), inter alia, denied defendants-appellants' motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a cause of action, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Andrew B. Siegel, for Plaintiff-Respondent.

Ronald Cohen, for Defendants-Appellants.

Before: Mazzarelli, J.P., Saxe, Lerner, Marlow, JJ.


The motion was properly denied as against the individual defendant since his affidavits in support thereof, asserting that he was not only the owner of the premises at the time of the accident but also the president of HT Co., and therefore plaintiff's co-employee against whom plaintiff's exclusive remedy is workers' compensation ( see Medrano v. Pritchard Indus., 298 A.D.2d 271), lacks documentary support conclusively demonstrating the claimed employment relationship ( see Goshen v. Mutual Life Ins. Co., 98 N.Y.2d 314, 326; Four Seasons Hotels v. Vinnik, 127 A.D.2d 310, 318; Rivera v. Mary Immaculate Hosp. Assn., 306 A.D.2d 265). Concerning Todaro Properties, issues of fact exist as to whether, inter alia, it owned or managed the property on the date of the accident and whether it and Todaro are alter egos ( cf. Donatin v. Sea Crest Trading Co., 181 A.D.2d 654). We have considered appellants' other arguments and find them unavailing.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

DeJesus v. Todaro

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 18, 2003
2 A.D.3d 282 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

DeJesus v. Todaro

Case Details

Full title:JOSE L. DeJESUS, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. HENRY TODARO, JR., ET AL.…

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

Date published: Dec 18, 2003

Citations

2 A.D.3d 282 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
768 N.Y.S.2d 333

Citing Cases

Gotlin v. City of New York

As Formica also is plaintiff's employer, plaintiff thus is barred by Workers' Compensation Law Section 11…

Dejesus v. Todaro

While this court previously held that a question of fact did indeed exist as to whether Todaro Properties…