DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
The Supreme Court properly dismissed the cause of action based on General Municipal Law § 205-a since there is no reasonable or practical connection between the violations alleged and the injuries sustained by the plaintiff firefighter (see, Kenavan v. City of New York, 267 A.D.2d 353; Dillon v. City of New York, 238 A.D.2d 302; Patsos v. Suffolk Charles Assoc., 226 A.D.2d 608).
The Supreme Court properly considered the arguments raised in the defendants' reply affirmation, since they were made in direct response to the plaintiffs' opposition papers (cf., Held v. Kaufman, 238 A.D.2d 546, affd 91 N.Y.2d 425; Murphy v. Hanover Ins. Co., 239 A.D.2d 323).