Isabella v. Koubek, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 16683

Passenger Matthew Isabella, injured while riding with coworker Roberta Oldenborg, received workers’ compensation; Oldenborg (driver) was immune from suit under N.Y. Workers’ Comp. Law § 29(6).
Isabella sued Doris Hallock (driver of the other car); Hallocks filed a third-party complaint seeking contribution/indemnification from vehicle owner Michael Koubek (Oldenborg’s husband), alleging Oldenborg’s negligence was the proximate cause.
Koubek moved for summary judgment, arguing § 29(6) immunity for Oldenborg bars derivative liability against the owner under N.Y. Veh. & Traf. Law § 388.
District Court denied summary judgment relying on a New York Supreme Court decision (Clamp) allowing contribution despite driver immunity; parties settled for $800,000 and the jury apportioned fault 90% Koubek / 10% Hallocks.
On appeal, the Second Circuit found conflicting New York authority and certified the controlling question to the New York Court of Appeals rather than resolving it itself.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether a defendant may seek contribution under VTL § 388 from a vehicle owner when the driver (whose negligence was a substantial factor) is immune from suit under WCL § 29(6)	Hallocks: § 388 permits contribution against an owner unrelated by employment; § 29(6) was not intended to bar suits between non-employer parties (relying on Clamp)	Koubek: § 29(6) (and § 11) makes workers’ compensation the exclusive remedy and bars derivative liability; owner’s vicarious liability depends on driver’s direct liability	The Second Circuit certified the question to the New York Court of Appeals, declining to decide due to conflicting state authorities and important state policy considerations

Rauch v. Jones, 4 N.Y.2d 592 (1958) (Court of Appeals barred suit against owner where co-employee driver was immune under workers’ compensation)
Naso v. Lafata, 4 N.Y.2d 585 (1958) (same-day companion decision reaching the same result as Rauch)
Kenny v. Bacolo, 61 N.Y.2d 642 (1983) (held owner not vicariously liable where driver was statutorily immune; precluded contribution)
Raquet v. Braun, 90 N.Y.2d 177 (1997) (permitted contribution claims against third parties even when plaintiff lacked direct action, where the third party is a culpable wrongdoer)
Tikhonova v. Ford Motor Co., 4 N.Y.3d 621 (2005) (allowed § 388 suit against owner despite driver’s diplomatic immunity, distinguishing workers’ compensation exclusivity)