Santoli v. Eastside Ventura LLC

Santoli v Eastside Ventura LLC

2025 NY Slip Op 32344(U) July 1, 2025

Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: Index No. 151648/2020 Judge: Denise M. Dominguez Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip Op 30001(U), are republished from various New York State and local government sources, including the New York State Unified Court System's eCourts Service. This opinion is uncorrected and not selected for official publication.

1

INDEX NO. 151648/2020 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/02/2025

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

NEW YORK COUNTY

PRESENT: HON. DENISE M DOMINGUEZ

Justice

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------X

JOSEPH P. SANTOLI, JACLYN SANTOLI

Plaintiffs - V -

EASTSIDE VENTURA LLC

Defendant

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------X

PART

INDEX NO.

MOTION DATE

151648/2020 09/01/2023

MOTION SEQ. NO. 003

DECISION+ ORDER ON

MOTION

27

The following e-filed documents, listed by NYSCEF document number (Motion 003) 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80,

81, 82, 83, 84, 86, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111,

112,113,114,116,117,118

were read on this motion to/for JUDGMENT - SUMMARY For the reasons that follow, Defendant EASTSIDE VENTURA LLC's motion pursuant to CPLR 3212 for summary judgment is granted in part and denied in part. Defendant moves for summary judgment to dismiss Plaintiffs' complaint arguing that the Labor Law §240¹and §241(6) claims must be dismissed because Plaintiff was not performing work covered under Labor Law and that Plaintiffs' Labor Law §200 claims fail as EASTSIDE VENTURA LLC did not create and had no notice of the condition that caused Plaintiff Joseph Santoli' s accident. Plaintiffs oppose.

Background

On February 3, 2020, Plaintiff Joseph Santoli, a plumber/steamfitter with non-party Aggressive Energy, was directed by his supervisor to fix a leaking pipe on the boiler in the

1 As it was unopposed, that portion of the Defendant's motion to dismiss §240 claims was granted per this Court's January 8, 2025 Order (NYSCEF Doc. 116).

151648/2020 SANTOLI, JOSEPH P. vs. EASTSIDE VENTURA LLC

Motion No. 003

Page 1 of 6

INDEX NO. 151648/2020 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/02/2025 basement of the Defendant's building, located at 421 E. 81st Street in Manhattan. Plaintiff went to the building with Pierre Andre Joseph, his partner from Aggressive Energy. They arrived at approximately 9:00 a.m., met with the building Superintendent, Jose Perez, who brought them to the boiler room in the basement of the subject building. When they arrived at the boiler room at approximately 9:15 a.m. the boiler was working, but a pipe at the back of the boiler was leaking. Plaintiff described the lighting as poor, but he could observe the leaking pipe at the back of the boiler. Plaintiff also observed the boiler's drainage pit, which was empty. Plaintiff described the condition of the pipe as one that occurred overtime. They examined the leak and determined that additional materials from their vehicle were needed. Before leaving the boiler room to retrieve the materials, Plaintiff opened the drain valve to drain the line of the boiler. Plaintiff then left the building, went to the truck and returned with needed materials. The accident occurred 30-60 second after the Plaintiff returned to the boiler room, at approximately 9:30 a.m. The Plaintiff alleges to have slipped dirt, grease and/or oil, which caused him to slip and fall into the drainage pit, where he various personal injuries. (NYSCEF Doc. 75, 80).

The building Super, Mr. Perez, arrived at the building at 7:00 a.m. that morning, and had been to the boiler room sometime between 7:30 and 8:30 a.m. At that time, he did not observe an oil, grease, dirt or dust on the floor of the boiler room and that the fluorescent lighting in the boiler room was working. Mr. Perez let the workers from Aggressive Energy into the building to fix a return line on the boiler. He brought them to the boiler room, and then left; he did not instruct the workers nor observe their work. (NYSCEF Doc. 75, 84).

Mr. Joseph submitted an affidavit in connection with this motion, describing this incident and averring that there was "oil, grease, dirt, bugs and moistness" on the boiler room floor and that there as poor lighting. (NYSCEF Doc. 94).

151648/2020 SANTOLI, JOSEPH P. vs. EASTSIDE VENTURA LLC Motion No. 003

2 of 6

Page 2 of 6

[* 2]

3

Discussion

INDEX NO. 151648/2020 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/02/2025 CPLR 3212 provides any party in any action, including in a negligence action, to move for summary judgment (CPLR 3212 [a], Andre v. Pomeroy, 35 N.Y.2d 361 [1974]). The party seeking summary judgment, even if unopposed has the high burden of establishing entitlement to judgment as a matter of law with evidence in admissible form (see CPLR 3212 [b], Voss v Netherlands Ins. Co., 22 N.Y.3d 728, 734 [2014], Giuffrida v Citibank Corp., 100 N.Y.2d 72, 81, 790 N.E.2d 772 [2003], Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 N.Y.2d 320, 324-25 [1986], see also Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557 [1980]). Only this showing is made does the burden shift to the opposing party to produce evidentiary proof in admissible form establishing the existence of material issues of fact requiring a trial (Alvarez 68 N.Y.2d at 324).

Upon review, Defendant has established that the work performed by Plaintiff Joseph Santoli at the time of this incident does not fall within the scope of the Labor Law §241(6). "The Industrial Code definition of' construction work,' which includes maintenance, must be construed consistently with this Court's understanding that section 241 [ 6] covers industrial accidents that occur in the context of construction, demolition and excavation" (Nagel v. D & R Realty Corp., 99 N.Y.2d 98, 103, 782 N.E.2d 558 [2002]; see also Esposito v. New York City Indus. Dev. Agency,

Page 3 of 6

INDEX NO. 151648/2020 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/02/2025 593 [1 ^st Dept 2021]; c.f. Rivera v. Ambassador Fuel & Oil Burner Corp., 45 A.D.3d 275 [1 ^st Dept. 2007]). Plaintiffs have not raised a material question of fact in opposition. Accordingly, that branch of Defendant's motion seeking to dismiss Plaintiff's Labor Law §241(6) claims is granted. Defendant also moves for summary judgment dismissing Plaintiffs' Labor Law §200 claim. Labor law §200 is a codification of the common-law duty and imposes upon an owner, or general contractor, the duty to provide and maintain a safe place to work (Rosa v 47 East 34th Street (NY), L.P., 208 AD3d 1075 [1st Dept 2022]). It is well settled that an implicit precondition to this duty is that the party to be charged with that obligation 'have the authority to control the activity bringing about the injury to enable it to avoid or correct an unsafe condition'." (Rizzuto v. L.A. Wenger Contracting Co., 91 N.Y.2d 343, 352 [1998], quoting Russin v Picciano & Son, 54 NY2d 311, 317 [1981 ]).

In support of its motion to dismiss the Labor Law §200 and common-law negligence claims, Defendant relies on the testimony of Mr. Perez, who stated that the lights were working in the boiler room and that there was no dirt and that there was no grease or debris on the floor when he inspected the area 1 to 2 hours prior to the accident. Plaintiffs oppose and rely upon the Plaintiff's deposition testimony that he slipped on dirt, grease and or oil (NYSCEF Doc. 80) and the sworn affidavit from Plaintiff's coworker, that alleges that the lighting was poor and that there was "oil, grease, dirt, bugs and moistness" (NYSCEF Doc. 94).

Upon review, the evidence shows that the Defendant did not direct Plaintiff's work and did not have control over how the work was performed (see Cappabianca v. Skanska USA Bldg. Inc.,

99 A.D.3d 139 [1st Dept 2012]). However, Plaintiff's opposition raises a question of fact as to whether the condition complained of was created by Defendant, or whether Defendant had notice of the condition. (see Mendoza v. Highpoint Assoa., IX, LLC, 83 A.D.3d 1 [1st Dept 2011]).

151648/2020 SANTOLI, JOSEPH P. vs. EASTSIDE VENTURA LLC

Motion No. 003

4 of 6

Page 4 of 6

[* 4]

5