If You’re Standing on a Bucket in a Labor Law Case, You’re Probably Winning Summary Judgment
In a recent decision, the Appellate Division, First Department unanimously affirmed a Supreme Court, Bronx County decision that granted plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment as to his Labor Law § 204(1) cause of action.
In DeOleo v. 90 Fifth Owner, LLC, 2024 NY Slip Op 05306, plaintiff was working at a construction site as an employee of a subcontractor and assigned to caulk windows as part of a building renovation project. During his deposition, plaintiff testified that just prior to the subject incident there were no ladders available in the supply room to complete his caulking work at the subject location. He informed his supervisor of the deficit of ladders at the construction site, who, according to plaintiff, directed him to “complete the task however he could.” To complete the task, plaintiff used a bucket he placed on top of a heating appliance to reach the window. While dismounting from the bucket, he stepped into a hole in the heating appliance cover, falling to the ground.
The First Department agreed with the lower Court, that plaintiff established prima facie that he was entitled to summary judgment as a matter of law as to liability on his Labor Law § 240(1) cause of action, as his work caulking the tops of windows that were approximately 12 feet off of the floor, and subjected him to elevation-related risks covered by § 240(1). Further, the bucket that plaintiff used to reach the windows was an inadequate safety device that failed to provide proper protection, and the failure to provide proper protection from the elevation-related risk warranted the granting of plaintiff’s motion.
The First Department rejected the defendant’s argument that plaintiff was the sole proximate cause of the subject incident because a statement from a supervisor that he believed “ladders were in plaintiff’s vicinity” at the time of the accident, was insufficient to raise a triable issue of fact and ultimately failed to satisfy the “sole proximate cause” test. None of the statements submitted in support of the defendant’s opposition established that plaintiff was informed that a ladder was necessary to complete his assignment on the date of the subject accident.
If you’re a plaintiff and the fact pattern begins with you standing on a bucket on in order to reach something, you’re probably going to be granted summary judgment if you get hurt and proceed with a lawsuit.
The DeOleo 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.
