PARTIES FAILED TO PRESENT EVIDENCE OF A “SPECIAL RELATIONSHIP”
A school bus operator was injured when her vehicle was hit from behind by another school bus owned by Grandpa’s Bus Co, Inc. When she later filed a personal-injury lawsuit, the defendants claimed that her case had to be dismissed because the parties had a “special relationship,” as defined by the Worker’s Compensation Law, which thus barred the litigation’s continuation.
After the Kings County Supreme Court denied that request, an appeal to the Appellate Division, Second Department, followed.
On its review, the AD2 noted that, in order to determine whether the Workers Compensation Law applied, the defendants needed to show such factors as who had “the right to control the employee's work,” how she was paid, who furnished the equipment, and who had the right to terminate or discharge her. Since the defendants neglected to satisfy that “initial burden,” the AD2 concluded they “failed to establish, prima facie, that the parties were in a special employment relationship,” and thus affirmed the underlying determination.
Think they needed to employ a different strategy there?
# # #
DECISION