Foster v. David J. Joseph Co.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• affirming dismissal of § 200 claim because “defendant did not exercise supervision or control over the manner or method of plaintiffs work”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

8 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Long v. John W. Danforth Co.
  Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York· 1997-02-07· cited 5×
• Krick v. Fluor Daniel, Inc.
  Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York· 1997-02-07· cited 5×
• Dahar v. Holland Ladder & Manufacturing Co.
  Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York· 2010-12-30· cited 3×
• Feigles v. Costal Lumber Co.
  W.D. New York· 1998-12-17· cited 1×
• Kobee v. Almeter Barry Construction Management, Inc.
  Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York· 1997-03-14· cited 1×
• Lopez v. 6071 Enters., LLC
  Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York· 2018-03-01
• Preston v. APCH, Inc.
  Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York· 2019-08-22
• Stoneham v. Joseph Barsuk, Inc.
  Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York· 2022-11-18

Cites

4 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Ross v. Curtis-Palmer Hydro-Electric Co.
  New York Court of Appeals· 1993-06-10· cited 1,744×
• Comes v. New York State Electric & Gas Corp.
  New York Court of Appeals· 1993-12-20· cited 855×
• Jock v. Fien
  New York Court of Appeals· 1992-10-29· cited 147×
• Warsaw v. Eastern Rock Products, Inc.
  Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York· 1993-05-28· cited 9×