Allan v. Rochester Institute of Technology

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Allan v. Rochester Institute of Technology

209 A.D.2d 929, 619 N.Y.S.2d 980

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedNovember 16, 1994

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 209 A.D.2d 929 (Allan v. Rochester Institute of Technology) 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

Allan v. Rochester Institute of Technology, 209 A.D.2d 929, 619 N.Y.S.2d 980 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly granted partial summary judgment to plaintiffs on the issue of defendants’ liability pursuant to Labor Law § 240 (1). William Allan, Jr. (plaintiff), an ironworker, fell approximately 30 feet when a beam upon which he was sitting became detached at one end and fell, throwing him to the ground. Plaintiff asserted that no safety devices were provided by defendants. Third-party defendants contend that a factual issue exists whether plaintiff was a recalcitrant worker.

We conclude that the evidence provided by third-party defendants, that safety belts and lines were available on the work site and that workers were told to use them, fails to raise a factual issue whether plaintiff "refused to use the safety devices that were provided by the owner or employer” under the circumstance in which plaintiff fell (Stolt v General Foods Corp., 81 NY2d 918, 920; see also, Hagins v State of New York, 81 NY2d 921; Murray v Niagara Frontier Transp. Auth., 199 AD2d 984; Laurie v Niagara Candy, 188 AD2d 1075, 1075-1076). (Appeals from Order of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Affronti, J.—Summary Judgment.) Present—Denman, P. J., Green, Balio, Doerr and Boehm, JJ.

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

—Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly granted partial summary judgment to plaintiffs on the issue of defendants’ liability pursuant to Labor Law § 240 (1). William Allan, Jr. (plaintiff), an ironworker, fell approximately 30 feet when a beam upon which he was sitting became detached at one end and fell, throwing him to the ground. Plaintiff asserted that no safety devices were provided by defendants. Third-party defendants contend that a factual issue exists whether plaintiff was a recalcitrant worker.

We conclude that the evidence provided by third-party defendants, that safety belts and lines were available on the work site and that workers were told to use them, fails to raise a factual issue whether plaintiff "refused to use the safety devices that were provided by the owner or employer” under the circumstance in which plaintiff fell (Stolt v General Foods Corp., 81 NY2d 918, 920; see also, Hagins v State of New York, 81 NY2d 921; Murray v Niagara Frontier Transp. Auth., 199 AD2d 984; Laurie v Niagara Candy, 188 AD2d 1075, 1075-1076). (Appeals from Order of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Affronti, J.—Summary Judgment.) Present—Denman, P. J., Green, Balio, Doerr and Boehm, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

209 A.D.2d 929, 619 N.Y.S.2d 980, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/allan-v-rochester-institute-of-technology-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack