August 20, 2019 | Vol. 172

  By

MUST READS
(2 summaries)
NOTEWORTHY IF YOU MUST READ

Labor Law §240   Labor Law §241   Safety Devices   Causation   Recalcitrant Worker   Sole Cause   Feigned Issue   Industrial Code  

First Department

Plaintiff’s contradictory testimony and claim that he fell backwards while standing on scaffold crossbar to enter building through window opening presented a feigned issue and even if believed it would not fall under Labor Law §240(1) where he was instructed and knew he was not allowed to enter through window opening. Plaintiff’s disobeying instruction and decision to remove his safety harness made him a recalcitrant worker and his actions were the sole proximate cause of his injuries.

Scaffold crossbar is not “a floor, passageway, walkway, scaffold, platform or other elevated working surface” under Industrial code §23-1.7(d)(slipping hazards) requiring dismissal of Labor Law §241(6) claim. There were 2 dissenters. Biaca-Neto v Boston Rd. II Hous. Dev. Fund Corp.


Premises Liab   Slip/Trip   Stairs   Last Inspection  

First Department

NYTA failed to meet burden for summary judgment on cleaner’s testimony that he was given cleaner’s manual and schedule for dealing with discarded metro cards on stairs but could not recall last time stairs were inspected or cleaned prior to the accident or whether he deviated from his usual routine on day of accident. Carela v New York City Tr. Auth.

NOTEWORTHY
(0 summaries)
MUST READS IF YOU MUST READ

IF YOU MUST READ
(0 summaries)
MUST READS NOTEWORTHY

About Matt McMahon

Civil trials and appeals since 1984. Retired partner McMahon | McCarthy.
Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.

Powered by Parabola & WordPress.