Opinion
CA 03-00690
October 2, 2003.
Appeal from that part of an order of Supreme Court, Monroe County (Siracuse, J.), entered January 8, 2003, that denied in part defendants' motion seeking summary judgment dismissing the complaint against defendant Gerald Laraby.
HARTER, SECREST EMERY LLP, ROCHESTER (RICHARD E. ALEXANDER OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
SCHIANO LAW OFFICE, P.C., ROCHESTER (CHARLES A. SCHIANO, JR., OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS.
PRESENT: GREEN, J.P., HURLBUTT, GORSKI, LAWTON, AND HAYES, JJ.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed with costs.
Memorandum:
Plaintiffs commenced this action to recover damages for injuries sustained by plaintiff Patricia Dromgoole and Erin Dromgoole, plaintiffs' daughter, when an automobile driven by Erin in which Patricia was a passenger collided with another automobile. Plaintiffs allege that, prior to the accident, the driver of the other automobile was served alcohol at T-Foots, a tavern owned and operated by defendant T-Foots, Inc., in violation of the Dram Shop Act (General Obligations Law 11-101). Defendant Gerald Laraby is president, sole shareholder and an employee of T-Foots, Inc.
Supreme Court properly denied in part defendants' motion seeking summary judgment dismissing the complaint against Laraby. "A decision to pierce the corporate veil is a fact-laden decision ( see Matter of Morris v. New York State Dept. of Taxation Fin., 82 N.Y.2d 135, 141), that is not well suited for summary judgment resolution ( see Forum Ins. Co. v. Texarkoma Transp. Co., 229 A.D.2d 341, 342)" ( Giarguaro S.p.A. v. Amko Intl. Trading, 300 A.D.2d 349, 350). Defendants have failed to establish as a matter of law that they are entitled to judgment dismissing the Dram Shop cause of action against Laraby ( see CPLR 3212 [b]). Further, discovery has not yet been conducted and "plaintiffs are entitled to obtain necessary discovery to ascertain whether there are grounds to pierce the corporate veil" ( Giarguaro S.p.A., 300 A.D.2d at 350; see CPLR 3212 [f]; First Bank of the Ams. v. Motor Car Funding, 257 A.D.2d 287, 293-294).