Inasmuch as the record discloses that defendant was, at all relevant times, directly responsible for supervising, directing and controlling plaintiff's work, the motion court properly concluded, as a matter of law, that plaintiff was a special employee of defendant and, accordingly, that he is barred from maintaining this action (see Workers' Compensation Law §§ 11, 29 [6]; Thompson v Grumman Aerospace Corp.,
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Let's get started
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
DUQUE v. PACE UNIVERSITY
308 A.D.2d 422 (2003)
764 N.Y.S.2d 826
CARLOS DUQUE, Appellant, v. PACE UNIVERSITY, Respondent and Third-Party Plaintiff-Respondent. ISS INTERNATIONAL SERVICES SYSTEMS, INC., Third-Party Defendant-Respondent.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
Decided September 30, 2003.
Decided September 30, 2003.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
Cited Cases
- No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.