Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)

DAVID BELDING, Respondent, v. VERIZON NEW YORK, INC., et al., Appellants.

OPINION OF THE COURT

MEMORANDUM.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed with costs. The certified question should be answered in the affirmative.

Applying the bomb blast film to the lobby windows, in and of itself, qualifies as a significant alteration ( see Labor Law § 240 ; Joblon v Solow, 91 NY2d 457, 465). BlastGARD significantly altered the configuration or composition of the structure by changing the way the lobby windows react to explosions, impacts and the elements. The effects of this one-time security enhancement distinguish the activity from affixing an advertisement on a billboard, a more frequent change that has less structural effect ( see Munoz v DJZ Realty, LLC, 5 NY3d 747).

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals ( 22 NYCRR 500.11), order affirmed, etc.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

DAVID BELDING v. VERIZON N.Y
(Feb 18, 2010)