Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Michael HILL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. WARNER BROTHERS, INC., et al., Defendants-Respondents.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Sheila Abdus-Salaam, J.), entered April 7, 1999, which granted defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact concerning his status as a special employee of defendant By Any Means Necessary Cinema (“BAMN”), notwithstanding his concurrent status as a general employee of IDC Services, which provided payroll services for BAMN, and thus his personal injury action is barred by the Workers' Compensation Law (see, Thompson v. Grumman Aerospace Corp., 78 N.Y.2d 553, 557-559, 578 N.Y.S.2d 106, 585 N.E.2d 355). The uncontroverted evidence establishes that defendants Spike Lee, Marvin Worth, Monty Ross, Jon Kulik a/k/a Jon Kilik, and Preston Holmes were all co-employees of plaintiff, which precludes an action against them (see, Workers' Compensation Law § 29[6]; Marange v. Slivinski, 257 A.D.2d 427, 684 N.Y.S.2d 199). The undisputed evidence also indicates that neither defendant Warner Brothers, Inc. nor defendant Forty Acres & A Mule Film Works took any part in the production of the film on which plaintiff was working when allegedly injured, and that defendant Palace Fried Chicken was located too far from the accident site to have contributed to the accident's cause. There is no evidence to support a finding of negligence on the part of defendant John Catsimatides.
MEMORANDUM DECISION.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: November 02, 2000
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)