Opinion
525637
05-31-2018
In the Matter of the Claim of Mark GARNER, Respondent, v. CHRISTIAN CONTRACTORS, INC., Appellant. Workers' Compensation Board, Respondent.
Tully Rinckey, PLLC, Albany (Graig F. Zappia of counsel), for appellant. Martin, Harding & Mazzotti, LLP, Albany (Crystle A. Watts, Niskayuna, of counsel), for Mark Garner, respondent. Barbara D. Underwood, Attorney General, New York City (Marjorie S. Leff of counsel), for Workers' Compensation Board, respondent.
Tully Rinckey, PLLC, Albany (Graig F. Zappia of counsel), for appellant.
Martin, Harding & Mazzotti, LLP, Albany (Crystle A. Watts, Niskayuna, of counsel), for Mark Garner, respondent.
Barbara D. Underwood, Attorney General, New York City (Marjorie S. Leff of counsel), for Workers' Compensation Board, respondent.
Before: McCarthy, J.P., Lynch, Devine, Clark and Pritzker, JJ.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Lynch, J.Appeal from a decision of the Workers' Compensation Board, filed March 8, 2017, which ruled that claimant was an employee of Christian Contractors, Inc.
Claimant, a carpenter, filed an amended claim for workers' compensation benefits asserting that he had sustained injuries on December 9, 2015 while working for Christian Contractors, Inc. Following a hearing, a Workers' Compensation Law Judge disallowed the claim, finding that claimant was an independent contractor and not an employee. Upon review, the Workers' Compensation Board reversed, finding that claimant had an employer-employee relationship with Christian Contractors, Inc. The Board restored the case to the calender for further development of the record on the remaining issues. Christian Contractors, Inc. appealed.As a general rule, "piecemeal review of issues in workers' compensation cases should be avoided" ( Matter of Bucci v. New York City Tr. Auth., 154 A.D.3d 1046, 1047, 60 N.Y.S.3d 849 [2017] [internal quotation marks and citation omitted]; see Matter of Covert v. Niagara County, 146 A.D.3d 1065, 1066, 43 N.Y.S.3d 763 [2017] ). Where "a Board decision is interlocutory in nature and does not dispose of all of the substantive issues or reach a potentially dispositive threshold legal question, it is not appealable" (Matter of Covert v. Niagara County, 146 A.D.3d at 1066, 43 N.Y.S.3d 763 [internal quotation marks, brackets and citation omitted]; see Matter of Bellantoni v. City of N.Y. Sch. Food & Nutrition Servs., 127 A.D.3d 1350, 1350, 4 N.Y.S.3d 562 [2015] ). Here, claimant filed a claim for workers' compensation benefits and "the Board's determination of whether an employee-employer relationship exists does not create a threshold legal issue so as to permit review by the Court prior to the Board's final decision of the claim" ( Matter of Estate of Yoo v. Rockwell Compounding Assoc., Inc., 158 A.D.3d 921, 922, 67 N.Y.S.3d 861 [2018] ; see Matter of Ogbuagu v. Ngbadi, 61 A.D.3d 1198, 1199, 876 N.Y.S.2d 769 [2009]; compare Matter of Schwenger v. NYU Sch. of Medicine, 126 A.D.3d 1056, 1057, 3 N.Y.S.3d 465 [2015], lv dismissed 26 N.Y.3d 962, 17 N.Y.S.3d 79, 38 N.E.3d 825 [2015] ). As the Board's nonfinal, interlocutory decision is reviewable on an appeal of the Board's final decision on the claim, the instant appeal is dismissed (see Matter of the Estate of Yoo v. Rockwell Compounding Assoc., Inc., 158 A.D.3d at 922, 67 N.Y.S.3d 861 ; Matter of Covert v. Niagara County, 146 A.D.3d at 1066, 43 N.Y.S.3d 763; Matter of Ogbuagu v. Ngbadi, 61 A.D.3d at 1199, 876 N.Y.S.2d 769 ; Matter of Karam v. Executive Charge/Love Taxi, 284 A.D.2d 599, 599, 725 N.Y.S.2d 577 [2001] ).
ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed, without costs.
McCarthy, J.P., Devine, Clark and Pritzker, JJ., concur.