Was Parking Garage Owner Immune to Hospital Tech’s Negligence Case?

What Do You Think?

New York's exclusive remedy rule protects employers from most tort lawsuits. But what happens when the worker sues an entity that has a different name but is intimately connected to the employer? A recent case involving an imaging technologist turns the spotlight on that issue.

The technologist for Brookdale hospital fell in the hospital’s parking garage and injured herself. She received workers’ compensation benefits from the hospital. She then sued Amboy Properties, the entity that held title to the parking garage, for negligence.

The boards of trustees for the hospital and Amboy had the same presiding chairman, board members, management, and staff. Amboy did not have a separate mailing address, email address, or website. According to board meeting minutes, Brookdale controlled Amboy’s day-to-day operations.

Amboy Properties asked the court to decide in its favor without a trial, based on the exclusive remedy rule. Under that rule, workers’ compensation is the sole remedy for an injured worker against his employer. In New York, the exclusive remedy rule applies to “alter egos” of the employer, as well.

A company can establish that it is an alter ego of the employer by demonstrating that: 1) one of the companies controls the other; or 2) the two operate as a single integrated entity.

Could the imaging tech sue Amboy?

A. No. The hospital controlled Amboy’s operations and Amboy didn’t appear to have its own identity.

B. Yes. Amboy had a different name and performed different functions than the hospital.

If you selected A, you agreed with the court in Gayle v. Brookdale Hospital Medical Center, No. 535016/2022 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 04/16/24), which found that Amboy was the hospital’s alter ego.

The court pointed out that the same individuals served on the board of the hospital and Amboy. The same chairman, for instance, served on the board for both entities. Further, the hospital, according to the minutes, ran Amboy’s daily operations.

The fact that Amboy lacked a separate address or web domain also suggested that it was the hospital’s alter ego. “Amboy Properties lacks indicia of a separate corporate existence,” the court said.

The court ruled that Amoboy was protected from lawsuit by the exclusivity rule.

Share This Article: