DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from; and it is further,
ORDERED that the order is reversed insofar as cross-appealed from, the cross motion is granted, and the cause of action pursuant to Labor Law § 240 Lab.(1) is dismissed insofar as asserted against the defendant County of Suffolk; and it is further,
ORDERED that the defendant County of Suffolk is awarded one bill of costs.
The evidence submitted by the defendant County of Suffolk established that the injured plaintiff's conduct was the sole proximate cause of his injuries (see, Tsangalidis v. O.K.G. Professional Consultants, 243 A.D.2d 627; Antonik v. New York City Hous. Auth., 235 A.D.2d 248; Cannata v. One Estate, 127 A.D.2d 811). The plaintiffs failed to come forward with evidence sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact. Consequently, the County's cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the cause of action predicated upon Labor Law § 240 Lab.(1) insofar as asserted against it should have been granted.
RITTER, J.P., SULLIVAN, ALTMAN and FEUERSTEIN, JJ., concur.