Summary
finding a triable issue of fact as to a corporate veil claim where "the companies had the same chief executive officer . . . at least some of the companies shared the same mailing address, and . . . the alleged subsidiaries were created to distance Mattone from the subject construction project"
Summary of this case from Skanska U.S. Bldg. Inc. v. Atl. Yards B2 Owner, LLCOpinion
2014-03-27
In re EAST 91ST STREET CRANE COLLAPSE LITIGATION: Maria Leo, etc., Plaintiff–Respondent, v. The City of New York, et al., Defendants, Mattone Group Construction Co. Ltd., et al., Defendants–Appellants. Leon D. DeMatteis Construction Corporation, Third–Party Plaintiff, v. Sorbara Construction Corp., Third–Party Defendant–Appellant. In re East 91st Street Crane Collapse Litigation: Xhevahire Sinanaj, et al., Plaintiffs–Respondents, v. The City of New York, et al., Defendants, Mattone Group Construction Co. Ltd., et al., Defendants–Appellants.
Garfunkel Wild, P.C., Great Neck (Roy W. Breitenbach of counsel), for Mattone Group Construction Co., Ltd., Mattone Group Ltd. and Mattone Group LLC, appellants. Wilson, Elser, Moskowitz, Edelman & Dicker LLP, New York (Glenn J. Fuerth of counsel), for New York Crane & Equipment Corp., James F. Lomma, James F. Lomma, Inc. and TES Inc., appellants.
Garfunkel Wild, P.C., Great Neck (Roy W. Breitenbach of counsel), for Mattone Group Construction Co., Ltd., Mattone Group Ltd. and Mattone Group LLC, appellants. Wilson, Elser, Moskowitz, Edelman & Dicker LLP, New York (Glenn J. Fuerth of counsel), for New York Crane & Equipment Corp., James F. Lomma, James F. Lomma, Inc. and TES Inc., appellants.
Smith Mazure Director Wilkins Young & Yagerman, P.C., New York (Marcia K. Raicus of counsel), for Leon D. DeMatteis Construction Corporation, appellant.
Cartafalsa Slattery Turpin & Lenoff, New York (Raymond Slattery of counsel), for Sorbara Construction Corp., appellant.
Andrea M. Arrigo, P.C., Brooklyn (Andrea M. Arrigo of counsel), for Maria Leo, respondent.
Susan M. Karten & Associates, LLP, New York (Susan Karten of counsel), for Sinanaj and Sinanovic respondents.
Orders, Supreme Court, New York County (Manuel J. Mendez, J.), entered on or about April 26, 2013 and May 6, 2013, which, in these consolidated actions alleging wrongful death arising from a crane collapse, denied the motions of defendants Mattone Group Construction Co. Ltd., Mattone Group Ltd., and Mattone Group LLC (collectively Mattone) for, inter alia, summary judgment dismissing the complaints and all cross claims as against them, unanimously affirmed, with costs.
The court properly found triable issues of fact regarding whether Mattone may be held liable as, inter alia, a developer of the construction project ( see Thompson v. St. Charles Condominiums, 303 A.D.2d 152, 155, 756 N.Y.S.2d 530 [1st Dept.2003],lv. dismissed 100 N.Y.2d 556, 763 N.Y.S.2d 814, 795 N.E.2d 40 [2003] ). The evidence shows that Mattone and another company submitted a joint proposal in 2004 in response to a request for bids by defendant New York City Educational Construction Fund (ECF) to develop the property, and that Mattone subsequently held itself out to the public as one of the developers, including after the 2008 accident.
The court also properly found triable issues of fact as to whether the corporate veil of any of Mattone's alleged subsidiaries should be pierced to hold Mattone liable. Among other relevant factors, the companies had the same chief executive officer, who has not been deposed, at least some of the companies shared the same mailing address, and Mattone's deponent indicated that the alleged subsidiaries were created to distance Mattone from the subject construction project ( see Forum Ins. Co. v. Texarkoma Transp. Co., 229 A.D.2d 341, 342, 645 N.Y.S.2d 786 [1st Dept.1996] ). We have considered Mattone's remaining arguments for affirmative relief and find them unavailing. GONZALEZ, P.J., ACOSTA, SAXE, RICHTER, MANZANET–DANIELS, JJ., concur.