Opinion

Brown v. 44 Street Development, LLC

  • 137 A.D.3d 703
  • 27 N.Y.S.3d 380
Court
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Filed
Mar 31, 2016
Status
Published
On the bench
Mazzarelli, Renwick, Moskowitz, Kapnick, Kahn
Cited by
12 cases
Authority
More cited than 71.8%

The opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Anil C. Singh, J.), entered March 23, 2015, which, insofar as appealed from, denied defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing plaintiffs’ claim pursuant to Labor Law § 240 (1), and granted plaintiffs’ motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of liability on that claim, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff was injured when, while carrying wood planks, he

*704

fell through an opening in a latticework rebar deck to a plywood form that was 12 to 18 inches below. “There is no bright-line minimum height differential that determines whether an elevation hazard exists”

(Auriemma v Biltmore Theatre, LLC,

82 AD3d 1, 9 [1st Dept 2011]), and here, the record establishes that plaintiff’s fall was the result of exposure to an elevation related hazard

(see Arrasti v HRH Constr. LLC,

60 AD3d 582 [1st Dept 2009]). We have considered defendants’ remaining arguments and find them unavailing.

Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Renwick, Moskowitz, Kapnick and Kahn, JJ.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.