Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
The cause of action based upon Labor Law § 240 (1) was properly dismissed because the plaintiff was working on a highway, and not a "building" or "structure" within the meaning of this statute ( see, Matter of Dillon v. State of New York, 201 A.D.2d 793; Matter of Dillon v. State of New York, 167 A.D.2d 574; Siragusa v State of New York, 117 A.D.2d 986; see also, Matter of Manente v Ropost, Inc., 136 A.D.2d 681).
In light of the foregoing, we do not reach the parties' remaining contentions. O'Brien, J.P., Ritter, Hart and Goldstein, JJ., concur.