Because plaintiff’s reason for remaining at defendant’s premises was purely personal and location of accident was not determinative, Appellate Division reversed and vacated the order granting summary judgment to defendant.

The plaintiff was a Certified Nursing Assistant working for Hackensack University Medical Center (HUMC) on the date of the incident. On that day, after she finished her overnight shift and had clocked out, she accompanied her son in the emergency room of HUMC. Her son was discharged a few hours later. While walking to her son’s car, in the hospital garage, she tripped and fell.

The plaintiff did not file a workers’ compensation claim, and a supplemental certification by HUMC confirmed its workers’ compensation carrier determined it was not covered. Instead, the plaintiff filed a complaint against HUMC. After discovery, HUMC filed a motion for summary judgment, which was granted. The trial court found the Workers’ Compensation Act barred her from suing HUMC because she never left the premises after her shift ended.

The plaintiff filed an appeal. After reviewing the summary judgment de novo, the Appellate Division reiterated that an employee could only receive workers’ compensation benefits for an accident that arose out of and in the course of employment. The premises rule looks at the location of the accident and control. In this case, the only dispute was whether the accident occurred in the course of employment. The Appellate Division compared this case to Zahner v. Pathmark Stores, Inc., 321 N.J. Super. 471 (App. Div. 2003), where the plaintiff was injured in her employer’s store, after her shift, while food shopping. In that case, the Appellate Division affirmed the trial court’s finding that the injury did not arise from her employment. Similarly, here, the plaintiff’s reason for remaining at HUMC was purely personal, and the location of the accident was not determinative. As such, the Appellate Division reversed and vacated the order granting summary judgment to HUMC. 

_{What’s Hot in Workers’ Comp, Vol. 28, No. 8, August 2024, is prepared by Marshall Dennehey to provide information on recent legal developments of interest to our readers. This publication is not intended to provide legal advice for a specific situation or to create an attorney-client relationship. We would be pleased to provide such legal assistance as you require on these and other subjects when called upon. ATTORNEY ADVERTISING pursuant to New York RPC 7.1 Copyright © 2024 Marshall Dennehey, all rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reprinted without the express written permission of our firm. For reprints or inquiries, or if you wish to be removed from this mailing list, contact tamontemuro@mdwcg.com.}