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.
Robert A. PUCKETT, et al., Plaintiffs, v. COUNTY OF ERIE, Buffalo Bills, Inc., A.D.F. Construction Corporation, Defendants-Respondents,
Donald J. Braasch Construction, Inc., Defendant-Appellant. County of Erie, et al., Third-Party Plaintiffs, v. Collana Brothers Construction Company, Inc., Third-Party Defendant-Respondent. (Appeal No. 3.)
Supreme Court properly granted the cross motion of third-party defendant, Collana Brothers Construction Company, Inc. (Collana), seeking summary judgment on its cross claim for common-law and contractual indemnification against defendant Donald J. Braasch Construction, Inc. (Braasch). Plaintiffs commenced this action to recover damages for injuries sustained by Robert A. Puckett (plaintiff), an employee of Collana, in an accident at a construction site while on loan to Braasch as a crane operator (see, Puckett v. County of Erie [appeal No. 1], 262 A.D.2d 964, 693 N.Y.S.2d 780 [decided herewith]; [appeal No. 2], 262 A.D.2d 966, 691 N.Y.S.2d 801 [decided herewith]). Collana met its initial burden by establishing that its liability is vicarious, and Braasch failed to raise an issue of fact. We reject Braasch's contention that our determination in Puckett v. County of Erie ( [appeal No. 2] 244 A.D.2d 865, 665 N.Y.S.2d 236) is the law of the case (see, Matter of Local 345 of Retail Store Empls. Union [Heinrich Motors], 96 A.D.2d 182, 186, 468 N.Y.S.2d 240, revd. on other grounds 63 N.Y.2d 985, 483 N.Y.S.2d 997, 473 N.E.2d 247). On that appeal, we were unable to determine from the record whether control of plaintiff had been surrendered by Collana and assumed by Braasch. The record now establishes that Braasch was exercising exclusive control and supervision over plaintiff at the time of the accident. The court also properly granted the cross motion of defendants County of Erie, Buffalo Bills, Inc. and A.D.F. Construction Corporation for summary judgment on their cross claim for common-law and contractual indemnification against Braasch. Because liability has not been determined (see, Puckett v. County of Erie [appeal No. 1], supra; [appeal No. 2], supra ), we modify the order by providing that the cross motion is granted conditionally upon a determination of liability (see, Delaney v. Spiegel Assocs., 225 A.D.2d 1102, 1103-1104, 639 N.Y.S.2d 637).
Order unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed without costs.
MEMORANDUM:
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: June 18, 1999
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth 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)