Diane Sanna v Rim, Inc.

Annotate this Case
Sanna v Rim, Inc. 2004 NY Slip Op 05635 [8 AD3d 649] June 28, 2004 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. As corrected through Wednesday, August 25, 2004

Diane Sanna, Respondent,
v
Rim, Inc., et al., Defendants, and U.S. Lock Corporation et al., Appellants.

—[*1]

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants U.S. Lock Corporation, WOC, Inc., Waxman Industries, Inc., and Waxman Consumer Products, Inc., appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Emerson J.), dated December 8, 2003, which denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, the complaint is dismissed insofar as asserted against the appellants, and the action against the remaining defendants is severed.

The appellants' assertion of the affirmative defense of workers' compensation was a bar to any recovery by the plaintiff (see Caceras v Zorbas, 74 NY2d 884, 885 [1989]; Singh v Shafi, 252 AD2d 494 [1998]). The appellants WOC, Inc., Waxman Industries, Inc., and Waxman Consumer Products, Inc., as interrelated companies of which the appellant U.S. Lock Corporation (hereinafter U.S. Lock) was a subsidiary, were sufficiently related to U.S. Lock, as the plaintiff's employer, so as to share in its workers' compensation defense (see Romano v Curry Auto Group, 301 AD2d 509 [2003]). S. Miller, J.P., Schmidt, Rivera and Spolzino, JJ., concur.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.