Bedassee v. 3500 Snyder Avenue Owners Corp.

266 A.D.2d 250, 698 N.Y.S.2d 289, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11357
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedNovember 8, 1999
StatusPublished
Cited by11 cases

This text of 266 A.D.2d 250 (Bedassee v. 3500 Snyder Avenue Owners Corp.) 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
Bedassee v. 3500 Snyder Avenue Owners Corp., 266 A.D.2d 250, 698 N.Y.S.2d 289, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11357 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendants 3500 Snyder Avenue Owners Corp. and JRD Management Corp. appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Rappaport, J.), dated October 20, 1998, as denied that branch of their motion which was for partial summary judgment dismissing the plaintiffs’ cause of action under Labor Law § 240 (1) and granted that branch of the plaintiffs’ cross motion which was for summary judgment on their Labor Law § 240 (1) cause of action insofar as asserted against those defendants.

Ordered that the order is modified, by deleting the provision thereof granting that branch of the plaintiffs’ cross motion which was for partial summary judgment against the appellants on the cause of action asserted under Labor Law § 240 (1) and substituting therefor a provision denying that branch of the plaintiffs’ cross motion; as so modified, the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs to the appellants.

The work performed by the injured plaintiff at the time of [251]*251his accident, i.e., cable wire installation at the defendants’ building, is an alteration covered by Labor Law § 240 (1) (see, Luthi v Long Is. Resource Corp., 251 AD2d 554, 555; Joblon v Solow, 91 NY2d 457, 463). However, questions of fact exist requiring the denial of summary judgment. Mangano, P. J., Bracken, S. Miller and Sullivan, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Breslin v. Access Auto Sales & Serv., LLC
2025 NY Slip Op 03615 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2025)
Gunderman v. Sure Connect Cable Installation, Inc.
101 A.D.3d 1214 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
Schick v. 200 Blydenburgh, LLC
88 A.D.3d 684 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
Rhodes-Evans v. 111 Chelsea LLC
44 A.D.3d 430 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)
Destefano v. City of New York
10 Misc. 3d 508 (New York Supreme Court, 2005)
Panek v. County of Albany
286 A.D.2d 86 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)
Mannes v. Kamber Management, Inc.
284 A.D.2d 310 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)
Otero v. Cablevision
186 Misc. 2d 651 (New York Supreme Court, 2000)
Smith v. Pergament Enterprises of S.I.
271 A.D.2d 870 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
266 A.D.2d 250, 698 N.Y.S.2d 289, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11357, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bedassee-v-3500-snyder-avenue-owners-corp-nyappdiv-1999.