Questions of Fact Regarding Covered Activities Preclude Summary Judgment
One of the first questions that comes up when examining a Labor Law case is whether the plaintiff was engaged in a “covered activity” as contemplated by the statute.
In a recent decision, the Appellate Division, First Department unanimously affirmed a lower Court decision that denied plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment as to his Labor Law § 240(1) cause of action.
In Pyankaroo v. Renali Realty Group 1, LLC, plaintiff alleged that he fell from a ladder while removing or reattaching a canvas storefront sign that was bolted into the building above the store’s front entrance.
Plaintiff testified that his work was undertaken to prepare the storefront for the intended work of replacing damaged fluorescent lighting components, including ballasts and conduit-housed wiring, located behind the store’s main advertising signs so that a new lighting system could be installed. This was part of a bigger project of replacing the storefront’s roll-down security gate on the front of the building.
In a relatively short decision, the First Department noted that while plaintiff’s activity had “earmarks” of routine maintenance, there were questions of fact as to whether “work had begun” and was underway at the time of his fall and thus, whether plaintiff was engaged in a covered activity under the statute.
If the line is blurry between when “preparation” work ends and “work begins,” you can count on a question of fact. This case presents a rare, but viable opportunity for a defendant to survive a summary judgment motion as to Labor Law § 240(1).
The Pyankaroo decision can be found here.
For additional information, contact Philip D. Priore, Esq. and/or Michael J. Shields, Esq.
This article was prepared by McCormick & Priore, P.C. to provide information on recent legal developments of interest to our readers. This publication is in no way intended to provide legal advice or to create an attorney-client relationship. All Rights Reserved. This article may not be reprinted without the express written permission of McCormick & Priore, P.C.