Ordered that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs payable by the appellants appearing separately.
While driving past the construction site of a residential project, the plaintiff Ignacious Antico, a New York City police officer, observed a man entering the rear of the complex. Antico went down the street and was approached by a watchman who informed him that he had just been bombarded by fireworks. Antico then pursued the suspect into the construction site, tripped over construction debris, and fell into a trench, sustaining injuries. The appellants, as owners and occupiers of the premises, moved to dismiss the complaint on the ground that any common-law cause of action was barred by the the rule in Santangelo v State of New York ( 71 N.Y.2d 393). We find that the appellants' motions were properly denied. On a motion addressed to the sufficiency of the complaint, the inquiry is whether the complaint, considered as a whole and construing the allegations in favor of the plaintiff, states "in some recognizable form any cause of action known to our law" (Dulberg v Mock, 1 N.Y.2d 54, 56; World Wide Adj. Bur. v Gordon Co., 111 A.D.2d 98). The bill of particulars can be read in connection with the complaint on a motion to dismiss (see, Nader v General Motors Corp., 25 N.Y.2d 560, 565). Here, we find that the complaint, together with the allegations of specific statutory violations in the bill of particulars, states a cognizable cause of action under General Municipal Law § 205-e (see, Santangelo v State of New York, 193 A.D.2d 25). Rosenblatt, J.P., Lawrence, O'Brien and Copertino, JJ., concur.