Cukar v. Compass Group USA Inc.

Defendants Did Not Owe Plaintiff an Independent Duty to Maintain Hospital Cafeteria Floor

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

OPINION & ORDER Plaintiff Gloria Cukar (“Plaintiff”), a former MidHudson Regional Hospital (“MHRH”) employee, brings this Action, not against the hospital, but against the one of the hospital’s service providers, Morrison Management Specialists, Inc. (“Morrison”), and its parent company, Compass Group USA, Inc. (“Compass”) (together, “Defendants”), alleging state law negligence claims related to a slip and fall incident in the cafeteria at MHRH. (See generally Compl. (Dkt. No. 1-1).) Before the Court is Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (the “Motion”). (Not. of Mot. (Dkt. No. 54).) For the reasons that follow, Defendants’ Motion is granted in its entirety. I. Background A. Factual Background The facts are taken from the Parties’ statements pursuant to Local Civil Rule 56.1, specifically, Defendants’ 56.1 Statement (“Defs.’ 56.1″), (Dkt. No. 55-1); Plaintiff’s Response to Defendants’ 56.1 Statement and Statement of Additional Facts (“Pl.’s 56.1″), (Dkt. No. 57-2); Defendants’ Reply 56.1 Statement (“Defs.’ Reply 56.1″), (Dkt. No. 60). Additionally, where necessary, the Court cites directly to the admissible evidence submitted by the Parties. The facts are recounted “in the light most favorable to” Plaintiff, the non-movant. Torcivia v. Suffolk County, 17 F.4th 342, 354 (2d Cir. 2021). The facts as described below are undisputed unless otherwise noted.¹ 1. Parties Plaintiff is a former MHRH employee, who worked there as a director of external relations, coordinating community engagement for the hospital, from 2015 until she retired in December of 2020. (Defs.’ 56.1

2, 10). Defendant Morrison is a food services contractor that operated at MHRH, providing food-related services and managers for MHRH’s cafeteria and cafeteria staff. (Id. at 3.) Defendant Compass is Morrison’s parent company. (See Defs.’ Mem. of Law in Supp. to Mot. for Summ. J. (“Defs.’ Mem.”) at 1 n.1 (Dkt. No. 55).) 2. Cafeteria Staff and Policies The cafeteria workers at MHRH were union employees, employed directly by MHRH, not Morrison. (Defs.’ 56.1

Cukar v. Compass Group USA Inc.

Defendants Did Not Owe Plaintiff an Independent Duty to Maintain Hospital Cafeteria Floor

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to New York Law Journal