Plaintiff was employed by GVK’s client when he was involved in a work-related accident while working on a project for Con Ed. During discovery, we established through document responses and deposition testimony there was no written agreement between plaintiff’s employer and Con Ed. Citing the lack of a contract or grave injury, we moved for summary judgment arguing Workers’ Compensation Law § 11 prohibited Con Ed’s third-party claims against GVK’s. Despite a $4.5M demand by plaintiff, Con Ed conceded its claims against GVK’s client lacked merit and voluntarily discontinued its third-party action.