From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Kaye v. Artmatic Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 25, 1995
214 A.D.2d 473 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

April 25, 1995

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Walter Schackman, J.).


There are issues of fact which preclude summary judgment on plaintiff's claim for statutory damages for commissions allegedly not timely paid to the decedent pursuant to Labor Law § 191-c, including whether the decedent falls within the statutory definition of a "sales representative" or was an "independent contractor" (Labor Law § 191-a [d]). Accordingly, it was proper for the court to refer the unresolved factual issues to a Referee. We note that the statute should be interpreted with an emphasis placed on whether the decedent, if found to be a sales representative, solicited orders from New York and not upon the location of the customers.

Concur — Ellerin, J.P., Rubin, Asch, Nardelli and Mazzarelli, JJ.


Summaries of

Kaye v. Artmatic Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 25, 1995
214 A.D.2d 473 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

Kaye v. Artmatic Corp.

Case Details

Full title:EDWARD P. KAYE, as Executor of LEO KAYE, Deceased, Appellant, v. ARTMATIC…

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

Date published: Apr 25, 1995

Citations

214 A.D.2d 473 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
625 N.Y.S.2d 216

Citing Cases

McCoy Associates, Inc. v. Nulux, Inc.

Indeed, as one New York court has stated, the emphasis must be on whether the person "solicited orders from…

Kahn v. Leo Schachter Diamonds, LLC

Defendants move to dismiss this claim on the ground that plaintiff is not a covered "sales representative,"…