Abbadessa v. Ulrik Holding Ltd.

244 A.D.2d 517, 664 N.Y.S.2d 620, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11838
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedNovember 24, 1997
StatusPublished
Cited by11 cases

This text of 244 A.D.2d 517 (Abbadessa v. Ulrik Holding Ltd.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Abbadessa v. Ulrik Holding Ltd., 244 A.D.2d 517, 664 N.Y.S.2d 620, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11838 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant appeals from an [518]*518order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Rappaport, J.), dated July 10, 1996, which denied its motion for summary judgment.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the defendant’s motion is granted, and the complaint is dismissed.

The plaintiffs alleged that the defendant, a property owner, was negligent, inter alia, in causing and permitting the public sidewalk adjoining its premises to be in a “dangerous, hazardous and unsafe condition”. The injured plaintiff, Jerome Abbadessa, a sanitation worker, was injured on the job when, while engaged with his partner in hoisting a discarded refrigerator into their sanitation truck, his foot slipped on a shelf that had apparently fallen out of the refrigerator and was concealed under some loose trash.

The complaint should be dismissed. According to the injured plaintiff’s own account, he elected to perform his job of hoisting a refrigerator into a sanitation truck while standing upon loose debris which easily could (and in fact did) constitute a slipping hazard. When a workman confronts the ordinary and obvious hazards of his employment, and has at his disposal the time and other resources (e.g., a co-worker) to enable him to proceed safely, he may not hold others responsible if he elects to perform his job so incautiously as to injure himself (see, e.g., Keating v Cookingham, 223 AD2d 997; Mercer v City of New York, 223 AD2d 688, 691, affd 88 NY2d 955). Bracken, J. P., O’Brien, Santucci, Friedmann and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Carrillo v. 457-467 Atl., LLC
2021 NY Slip Op 02378 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2021)
Ochoa-Hoenes v. Finkelstein
2019 NY Slip Op 3795 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
Rojas v. 1000 42nd St., LLC
2018 NY Slip Op 2194 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)
Sepulveda-Vega v. Suffolk Bancorp.
119 A.D.3d 850 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)
Wagner v. Wody
98 A.D.3d 965 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
Spence v. Island Estates at Mt. Sinai II, LLC
79 A.D.3d 936 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
Steiner v. Benroal Realty Associates, L.P.
290 A.D.2d 551 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002)
Marin v. San Martin Restaurant, Inc.
287 A.D.2d 441 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)
Ercole v. Academy Fence Co.
256 A.D.2d 305 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1998)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
244 A.D.2d 517, 664 N.Y.S.2d 620, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11838, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/abbadessa-v-ulrik-holding-ltd-nyappdiv-1997.