Holes at Construction Sites Are a Quick Way Between Floors and to Summary Judgment
In a recent decision, the Supreme Court, New York County granted plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment as to his Labor Law § 240(1) cause of action. That same decision also granted the general contractor defendant’s motion for summary judgment as to plaintiff’s Labor Law §§ 200 and 241(6) claims (as predicated on violations of Industrial Code § 23-1.5(c)(3), 23-1.7, 23-16 and 23-1.17.
In Caguana v. 111 W. 57th Prop. Owner, LLC, 2024 NY Slip OP 33974(U), plaintiff was injured while he was working at a construction site. Plaintiff’s work at the subject site included setting up metal and wood forms for concrete pours and then removing the forms once the concrete cures. On the date of the subject incident, plaintiff was equipped with a hardhat and safety harness, but there was no lifeline to which to hook his harness. At the time of the subject incident, plaintiff was working on the 9th floor of the subject building, and had been tasked with carrying a form, measuring eight-feet by three-feet wide, from one location to another for instillation. The floor in that area was made of wooden planks, as no concrete had yet been poured. As plaintiff was carrying the form, he stepped on a piece of plywood and fell through a hole in the floor down to the 8th floor.
As to plaintiff’s Labor Law § 240(1) cause of action, the Supreme Court, New York County turned to a plethora of long-standing precedent that the statute is violated when a worker falls through an unprotected floor opening. Relying on plaintiff’s uncontroverted testimony in this regard, the Court found that plaintiff established his prima facie entitlement to summary judgment as a matter of law. The Court rejected the defendants’ argument that a question of fact exists as to how the subject incident occurred.
Because plaintiff is entitled to summary judgment on the issue of liability as to Labor Law § 240(1), the issue of § 241(6) is academic (plaintiff’s damages are the same under either theory of liability but plaintiff may only recover once).
A hole in a construction site that plaintiff falls through is going to give you summary judgment every time. This matter is added to vast sea of jurisprudence with similar fact patterns, granting plaintiff summary judgment for falling through a hole.
The Caguana 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.