AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges

CARMEN ESTEVES, ET AL., plaintiffs, v. WE TRANSPORT, L.P., ET AL., defendants (ACTION NO. 1). HARRY MILBURN, plaintiff-respondent,

ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with one bill of costs to the respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs.

The appellants contend that We Transport, Inc., and Towne Bus Corp. are a single, integrated enterprise and, as such, they are entitled to summary judgment pursuant to the exclusivity clause under Workers' Compensation Law § 11. Contrary to the appellants' contention, they failed to submit sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case that the two corporations constitute a single, integrated enterprise (see, Kramer v. NAB Const. Co., A.D.2d [2d Dept., Apr. 30, 2001], Levine v. Lee's Pontiac, 203 A.D.2d 259; Kaplan v. Bayley Seton Hosp., 201 A.D.2d 461).

RITTER, J.P., FRIEDMANN, LUCIANO and SMITH, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

ESTEVES v. WE TRANSPORT
(Aug 13, 2001)