AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
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
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

MARVIN DELLA CROCE, ET AL., PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS-RESPONDENTS, v. THE CITY OF NEW YORK, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT-APPELLANT.

Plaintiff, a Transit Authority employee, alleges that he fell off a ladder while attaching a three-by-five-foot bulletin board to the wall of a subway station locker room owned by defendant City. The motion court correctly held that such work did not involve "making a significant physical change to the configuration or composition of the building or structure," and therefore did not constitute "altering" within the meaning of Labor Law § 240(1) (Joblon v. Solow, 91 N.Y.2d 457, 465;compare, Futterman v. Rela Realty Corp., 283 A.D.2d 261, with Catoliato v. Sam's Club, 254 A.D.2d 62, lv dismissed 93 N.Y.2d 888).

Plaintiff's claims based on Labor Law § 241(6) should also have been dismissed since plaintiff was not performing any of the tasks enumerated in Rule 23 of the Industrial Code ( 12 NYCRR 23-1.4 [b][13]) when he was injured (see, Joblon, supra, at 466).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

CROCE v. CITY OF NEW YORK
(Aug 29, 2002)