Not a Lexis+ subscriber? Try it out for free.
LexisNexis® CLE On-Demand features premium content from partners like American Law Institute Continuing Legal Education and Pozner & Dodd. Choose from a broad listing of topics suited for law firms, corporate legal departments, and government entities. Individual courses and subscriptions available.
A New York appellate court held there was conflicting evidence as to whether the plaintiff’s employer had the right to exercise control over a construction worker who was performing sheetrock work at the employer’s premises. Accordingly, the trial court did not err when it refused to grant a summary judgment motion filed by the defendant sheetrock worker who had been sued by the plaintiff for injuries she sustained when she was struck by a sheetrock panel. The appellate court acknowledged that the plaintiff could not maintain a civil action against the construction worker if he was properly characterized as a special employee of the plaintiff’s own employer. The court agreed, however, that the defendant had failed to make a prima facie showing that he was under the purported special employer’s control. The issue would move forward for determination by the trial court.
Thomas A. Robinson, J.D., the co-Editor-in-Chief and Feature National Columnist for the LexisNexis Workers’ Compensation eNewsletter, is co-author of Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law(LexisNexis).
LexisNexis Online Subscribers: Citations below link to Lexis Advance.
See Leonard v. Wenz, 2021 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3747 (2d Dept., June 10, 2021)
See generally Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 111.01.
Source: Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, the nation’s leading authority on workers’ compensation law
For a more detailed discussion of the case, see
Sign up for the free LexisNexis Workers’ Compensation enewsletter at www.lexisnexis.com/wcnews.