From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mathew v. Marriott Facility Management

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 26, 1996
224 A.D.2d 668 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

Opinion

February 26, 1996

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Garry, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

We reject the appellants' arguments that the complaint should have been dismissed because the defendant Marriott Facility Management was a "special employer" of the plaintiff, and, since the plaintiff elected to receive workers' compensation benefits from a general employer, they are shielded from any action at law (see, Richiusa v. Kahn Lbr. Millwork Co., 148 A.D.2d 690). The question of whether a special employment relationship exists is usually an issue of fact (see, Thompson v. Grumman Aerospace Corp., 78 N.Y.2d 553, 557; Matter of Abramson v. Long Beach Mem. Hosp., 103 A.D.2d 866), and the issue may in some cases turn on the terms of a written contract (see, Thompson v. Grumman Aerospace Corp., supra, at 559). Given the provisions of the contract between the appellants and the general employer, an issue of fact remains. Balletta, J.P., O'Brien, Ritter, Pizzuto and Altman, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Mathew v. Marriott Facility Management

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 26, 1996
224 A.D.2d 668 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
Case details for

Mathew v. Marriott Facility Management

Case Details

Full title:SAMUEL K. MATHEW et al., Respondents, v. MARRIOTT FACILITY MANAGEMENT et…

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

Date published: Feb 26, 1996

Citations

224 A.D.2d 668 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
638 N.Y.S.2d 919