Case Name: Scot D. Thompson, Respondent, v. Bernard G. Janowitz Construction Corp., Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff, East and West Concrete Corp., Appellant, et al., Third-Party Defendant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2003-01-21
Citations: 301 A.D.2d 589
Docket Number: 
Parties: Scot D. Thompson, Respondent, v Bernard G. Janowitz Construction Corp., Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff, East and West Concrete Corp., Appellant, et al., Third-Party Defendant.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 301
Pages: 589–589

Head Matter:
Scot D. Thompson, Respondent, v Bernard G. Janowitz Construction Corp., Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff, East and West Concrete Corp., Appellant, et al., Third-Party Defendant.
[753 NYS2d 848]

Opinion:
—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant East and West Concrete Corp., appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Lally, J.), entered June 25, 2002, which denied its motion for summary judgment.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The Supreme Court properly denied the motion of the defendant East and West Concrete Corp. for summary judgment because there is a question of fact as to whether it exercised direction, control, or supervision over the plaintiff's work on the day of the accident (see Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557; D'Amico v New York Racing Assn., 203 AD2d 509, 510; cf., Schulz v Esposito, 210 AD2d 307, 308). Florio, J.P., O'Brien, Adams and Crane, JJ., concur.