Michael L. Boulhosa

Michael Boulhosa (Partner-White Plains) and Eian Weiner (Associate-White Plains) obtained summary judgment in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, New York County, on behalf of a plumbing company. The plaintiff in this matter alleges he was injured while working as an assistant for our client/insured, who the property owner retained to install a new low-pressure gas line on the subject premises. The plaintiff maintains he fell over a railing onto the sidewalk below while attempting to retrieve materials the client left behind at the job site, allegedly sustaining a traumatic brain injury (TBI) and other severe injuries, leaving him with lifelong disabilities, according to his treating physicians. The plaintiff did not return to work after the accident and received workers’ compensation benefits through our client. 

Two construction projects were ongoing at the premises when the plaintiff's accident occurred. Our client had no contractual relationship with the general construction manager, subcontractors or others working at the job site, including the construction firm or the scaffolding services company. Our client was brought into the underlying lawsuit as a third-party defendant, with the construction and scaffolding businesses seeking common law indemnification and contribution and the property owner pursuing claims for common law and contractual indemnification, contribution and damages for breach of contract. 

Michael and Eian filed a motion seeking summary judgment regarding the third-party claims against the client by the construction company, the scaffolding business and the property owner, based on Section 11 of the Workers’ Compensation Law. The statute prohibits third-party indemnification claims against an employer unless the employee sustains a statutorily enumerated "grave injury," rendering the injured party totally and permanently disabled and incapable of obtaining a position of gainful employment in any capacity or a pre-existing written contract expressly agreeing to indemnification exists. At oral argument, Michael and Eian argued that the record lacked evidence that the plaintiff's alleged TBI qualifies as a grave injury under the statute or that the client agreed to indemnify the property owner. Finally, the Court granted Wilson Elser’s motion regarding the property owner's third-party claims for contractual indemnification and breach of contract, as no written contract existed in which the client agreed to indemnify the property owner.

Michael and Eian’s Motion for summary judgment was granted in its entirety. All claims against the client through multiple third-party lawsuits were dismissed as a matter of law following a last demand of $2.5 million.