First Department Gives Us Hope on New Years Eve, 2024
A final parting gift from the First Department to bid 2024 “Adieu!”
In a recent decision the Appellate Division, First Department unanimously reversed a Supreme Court, New York County decision that granted plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability as to his Labor Law § 240(1) cause of action.
In Gkoumas v. Lewis Construction and Architectural Mill Work, et al., 2024 NY Slip Op 06654, plaintiff alleged that he was injured while working at a construction site while he was attaching refrigeration lines to an air conditioning unit in the ceiling of a laundry room. Plaintiff testified that he was working alone in the laundry room and that he was standing on an A-frame ladder that was not held by anyone else when the ladder shifted, causing him to fall to the ground.
After discovery, plaintiff moved for summary judgment. Defendants opposed the motion, arguing that an issue of fact exists as to whether plaintiff ever even fell off of the subject ladder, given “various versions of events in his worker’s compensation and medical records, when compared to his deposition testimony.” The Supreme Court, New York County found the argument that these alternative versions of the events, which collectively created an issue of fact regarding the happening of the subject incident, to be without merit, and granted plaintiff’s motion.
Upon review, the Appellate Division, First Department disagreed. In its decision it found that the deposition testimony of plaintiff’s supervisor, which stated that plaintiff had a conversation with him stating “he cut his hand because his tool slipped” and made no mention of falling from a ladder, was persuasive, calling into question plaintiff’s credibility as to the manner in which the accident occurred. It then unanimously reversed the lower Court’s decision.
The trend, confirmed here during the twilight hours of 2024, is that if your case is in the Appellate Division, First Department, you’re much more likely to see a question of fact as to plaintiff’s inconsistent statements when compared to cases brought in the Second Department.
The Gkoumas 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.