Valentin v Melcar Garage, Inc.

Valentin v Melcar Garage, Inc. 2008 NY Slip Op 02751 [49 AD3d 463] March 27, 2008 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. As corrected through Wednesday, May 14, 2008

Eddie H. Valentin, Respondent,
v
Melcar Garage, Inc., Appellant, et al., Defendants.

—[*1] Bivona & Cohen, P.C., New York City (Kevin J. Donnelly of counsel), for appellant.

Grossman & Grossman, P.C., New York City (Brett M. Grossman of counsel), for respondent.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Milton A. Tingling, J.), entered June 21, 2007, which, in an action for personal injuries sustained by a parking garage attendant in a parking garage operated by defendant Melcar Garage, Inc. (Melcar), denied Melcar's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against it as barred by the exclusivity provisions of the Workers' Compensation Law, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Melcar's motion was properly denied for lack of documentation showing, inter alia, exactly who paid plaintiff and supervised his daily activities, and that such person or entity, if not Melcar itself, is Melcar's alter ego (see Hughes v Solovieff Realty Co., L.L.C., 19 AD3d 142, 143 [2005]). In view of the foregoing, we need not reach Melcar's argument that plaintiff's injuries are not "grave" within the meaning of the statute and that any common-law claims against it must therefore be dismissed. Concur—Friedman, J.P., Gonzalez, McGuire and Moskowitz, JJ.