From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Edlitz v. Nipkow Kobelt, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Aug 16, 1999
264 A.D.2d 437 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)

Opinion

August 16, 1999.

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Westchester County (DiBlasi, J.)


Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Under an employment contract between the plaintiff and the defendant, the plaintiff was entitled to a 1 and 1/2% commission on all sales made by Loomtex, a subsidiary of the defendant corporation, and all over-the-counter sales made by the defendant or its retail divisions after March 17, 1993. The plaintiff's employment ended June 2, 1995, and the plaintiff is seeking to recover commissions of $23,284.50, travel expenses of $74.85, and $3,000 withheld from the plaintiff's wages due to a customer's failure to pay the defendant.

The plaintiff moved for partial summary judgment and submitted the sales records supporting the claimed commissions and travel expenses. Upon this showing, the burden shifted to the defendant to demonstrate an issue of fact requiring a trial. The defendant, however, presented only conclusory statements and allegations, which are insufficient to defeat a motion for summary judgment, to support its assertion that the plaintiff is not owed any commissions or travel expenses ( see, Zuckerman v. City of New York, 49 N.Y.2d 557; Orix Credit Alliance v. Grace Indus., 232 A.D.2d 464). Summary judgment was, therefore, appropriately granted on the first and third causes of action.

The deduction by the defendant of $3,000 from the plaintiff's wages violated Labor Law § 193, and summary judgment was, therefore, properly granted on the fourth cause of action ( see, Labor Law § 193 Lab.; Matter of Hudacs v. Frito-Lay, Inc., 90 N.Y.2d 342).

O'Brien, J. P., Sullivan, H. Miller and Smith, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Edlitz v. Nipkow Kobelt, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Aug 16, 1999
264 A.D.2d 437 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
Case details for

Edlitz v. Nipkow Kobelt, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:LARRY EDLITZ, Respondent, v. NIPKOW KOBELT, INC., Appellant

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Aug 16, 1999

Citations

264 A.D.2d 437 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
694 N.Y.S.2d 439

Citing Cases

Pachter v. Bernard Hodes Group, Inc.

Similarly, an employer violates Section 193 when it reduces an employee's wages to reflect a client's failure…

Pachter v. Bernard Hodes Group, Inc.

Similarly, an employer violates Section 193 when it reduces an employee's wages to reflect a client's failure…