| Myung Sook Cho-Oh v Choi |
| 2013 NY Slip Op 00187 [102 AD3d 755] |
| January 16, 2013 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| Myung Sook Cho-Oh, Appellant, v Angie Choi etal., Respondents. |
—[*1] Morris, Duffy, Alonso & Faley, LLP, New York, N.Y. (Anna J. Ervolina and AndreaM. Alonso of counsel), for respondents.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from anorder of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Sampson, J.), entered June 23, 2011, whichgranted the defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
Workers' Compensation Law § 29 (6) provides that "[t]he right tocompensation or benefits under this chapter, shall be the exclusive remedy to anemployee, or in case of death his or her dependents, when such employee is injured orkilled by the negligence or wrong of another in the same employ." "Workers'compensation qualifies as an exclusive remedy when both the plaintiff and the defendantare acting within the scope of their employment, as coemployees, at the time of injury"(Macchirole v Giamboi, 97 NY2d 147, 150 [2001]).
Under the circumstances of this case, the defendants submitted sufficient evidence todemonstrate, as a matter of law, that the exclusivity provisions of Workers'Compensation Law § 29 (6) barred the plaintiff from bringing this action againstthem (see Goode vWoodside, 74 AD3d 1279, 1280-1281 [2010]; Torre v Schmucker, 275AD2d 365, 366 [2000]; Velasquez v Pine Grove Resort Ranch, 61 AD2d 1102,1103 [1978]). The plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact in opposition.
Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the defendants' motion forsummary judgment dismissing the complaint. Rivera, J.P., Chambers, Roman and Cohen,JJ., concur.