GONZALEZ v. 310 WEST 38TH, L.L.C

Appellant's argument that it is the alter ego of plaintiff's employer, and that the Workers' Compensation Law therefore bars the action as against it, was correctly rejected by the motion court on the ground that the record fails to demonstrate that plaintiff's employer exercised complete domination and control over appellant's everyday operations ( see Allen v. Oberdorfer Foundries, 192 AD2d 1077; Cruz v. HSS Props. Corp., 309 AD2d 720). However, the record does conclusively demonstrate that plaintiff was engaged in the painting of a building when injured, and that he is therefore protected by Labor Law § 240 (1). We have considered appellant's other arguments and find them unavailing.