Bosch v. 229 West 97 Realty Associates

279 A.D.2d 373, 719 N.Y.S.2d 564, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 694
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJanuary 23, 2001
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 279 A.D.2d 373 (Bosch v. 229 West 97 Realty Associates) 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
Bosch v. 229 West 97 Realty Associates, 279 A.D.2d 373, 719 N.Y.S.2d 564, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 694 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward Lehner, J.), entered July 8, 1999, which, in an action under Labor Law § 240 (1), granted defendants-respondents’ motions for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against them, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Defendants-respondents are the governing body of condominium association responsible for the maintenance of the common elements of the building in which plaintiffs were injured, and the cooperative corporation that owns the residential units in the building. Another defendant is the sponsor of the condominium conversion, who retained “unsold shares” in the particular apartment that plaintiffs were improving when they were injured, and who would be the party responsible under Labor Law § 240. The action was properly dismissed as against respondents on the basis of evidence establishing that the sponsor had the right to make improvements to the subject apartment without respondents’ consent; that it was the sponsor, acting on its own and not as respondents’ agent, who hired plaintiffs’ employer; and that the work that plaintiffs were doing at the time they were injured did not involve the building’s common elements (see, Brown v Christopher St. Owners Corp., 211 AD2d 441, affd for other reasons 87 NY2d 938; Ceballos v Kaufman, 249 AD2d 40), but rather a sheetrock ceiling in the bathroom of an apartment. Concur — Sullivan, P. J., Rosenberger, Tom, Ellerin and Friedman, JJ.

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

Related

Sarigul v. New York Telephone Co.
4 A.D.3d 168 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2004)
Abbatiello v. Lancaster Studio Associates
307 A.D.2d 788 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)
Pineda v. 79 Barrow Street Owners Corp.
297 A.D.2d 634 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
279 A.D.2d 373, 719 N.Y.S.2d 564, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 694, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bosch-v-229-west-97-realty-associates-nyappdiv-2001.