DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
To prevail on a cause of action under Labor Law § 240(1), a plaintiff must show a violation of the statute, and that such violation was a proximate cause of his or her injuries ( see Bland v. Manocherian, 66 N.Y.2d 452; Skalko v. Marshall's Inc., 229 A.D.2d 569, 570). A plaintiff cannot prevail on a motion for summary judgment under Labor Law § 240(1) if there is any view of the evidence which would permit a finding that the defendant's violation of that statute was not a proximate cause of the plaintiff's accident ( see Zimmer v. Chemung County Performing Arts, Inc., 65 N.Y.2d 513, 524; Mejia v. African M.E. Allen Church, 271 A.D.2d 583, 584).
Where, as here, there is inconsistent deposition testimony as to how the accident occurred, a triable issue of fact regarding the proximate cause of the accident exists, precluding summary judgment ( see Bland v. Manocherian, supra; Williams v. Dover Home Improvement, 276 A.D.2d 626, 627).
PRUDENTI, P.J., SMITH, McGINITY and COZIER, JJ., concur.