From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rothenberg v. Lowey

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 12, 1983
94 A.D.2d 651 (N.Y. App. Div. 1983)

Opinion

May 12, 1983


Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Greenfield, J.), entered on February 5, 1982 unanimously affirmed, without costs and without disbursements.

Concur — Carro, J.P., Fein, Lynch and Kassal, JJ.


While I am in agreement with the conclusion reached at Special Term, I am constrained to point out that since the subject of the suit is "wages" rather than "wage supplements" the governing section of the Labor Law is section 198-a and not section 198-c. Although both sections are penal in nature, the law is plain that the statute gives rise to a right of civil action in addition to a right to proceed criminally (cf. Sasso v Millbrook Enterprises, 108 Misc.2d 562; Goldstein v Mangano, 99 Misc.2d 523; Courtney v Brooklyn Queens Allied Oil Burner Corp., 112 Misc.2d 89). By its terms section 198-a imposes liability not only on the corporation but upon "the officers and agents of [the] corporation who knowingly permit the corporation to violate this chapter by failing to pay the wages of any of its employees". Accordingly, the result reached at Special Term was correct.


Summaries of

Rothenberg v. Lowey

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 12, 1983
94 A.D.2d 651 (N.Y. App. Div. 1983)
Case details for

Rothenberg v. Lowey

Case Details

Full title:ARTHUR ROTHENBERG, Respondent, v. DAVID LOWEY et al., Appellants

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

Date published: May 12, 1983

Citations

94 A.D.2d 651 (N.Y. App. Div. 1983)