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

Donald BROWN, et al., Plaintiffs–Respondents, v. 44 STREET DEVELOPMENT, LLC, et al., Defendants–Appellants.

Ropers Majeski Kohn & Bentley, New York (Jason L. Beckerman of counsel), for appellants.

Rimland & Associates, P.C., New York (Robert Elan of counsel), respondents.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Anil C. Singh, J.), entered March 23, 2015, which, insofar as appealed from, denied defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing plaintiffs' claim pursuant to Labor Law § 240(1), and granted plaintiffs' motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of liability on that claim, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff was injured when, while carrying wood planks, he fell through an opening in a latticework rebar deck to a plywood form that was 12 to 18 inches below. "There is no bright-line minimum height differential that determines whether an elevation hazard exists" (Auriemma v. Biltmore Theatre, LLC, 82 A.D.3d 1, 9, 917 N.Y.S.2d 130 [1st Dept.2011] ), and here, the record establishes that plaintiff's fall was the result of exposure to an elevation related hazard (see Arrasti v. HRH Constr. LLC, 60 A.D.3d 582, 876 N.Y.S.2d 373 [1st Dept.2009] ). We have considered defendants' remaining arguments and find them unavailing.

MAZZARELLI, J.P., RENWICK, MOSKOWITZ, KAPNICK, KAHN, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

Brown v. 44 Street Development, LLC
(Mar 31, 2016)