Hayles v. Patmast Acquiring Corp.

Full title: LUCIA HAYLES, Appellant, v. PATMAST ACQUIRING CORP. et al., Defendants…

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

Date published: Jan 10, 1995

211 A.D.2d 445 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

621 N.Y.S.2d 859

Opinion

January 10, 1995

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Barry Salman, J.).

Plaintiff's complaint against her employer, Creative Bakers, Inc., was properly dismissed as plaintiff's exclusive remedy lies under the Workers' Compensation Law (Workers' Compensation Law §§ 11, 23, 29; see, Billy v. Consolidated Mach. Tool Corp., 51 N.Y.2d 152, 159; Bardere v. Zafir, 102 A.D.2d 422, 423, affd 63 N.Y.2d 850). Plaintiff's cross motion pursuant to CPLR 3212 (f) was also properly denied, as the issues which plaintiff sought to discover regarding the inter-relationship between defendant Patmast Acquiring Corp. and the moving defendant employer had no bearing upon the issue of whether plaintiff had a right to maintain a separate cause of action for personal injuries against the employer (see, Heritage v. Van Patten, 59 N.Y.2d 1017).

Concur — Kupferman, J.P., Ross, Rubin and Williams, JJ.