Brandl v. Ram Builders, Inc.

7 A.D.3d 655, 777 N.Y.S.2d 511
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMay 17, 2004
StatusPublished
Cited by16 cases

This text of 7 A.D.3d 655 (Brandl v. Ram Builders, Inc.) 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
Brandl v. Ram Builders, Inc., 7 A.D.3d 655, 777 N.Y.S.2d 511 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant Ram Builders, Inc., appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Winick, J.), dated March 10, 2003, as granted the plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability pursuant to Labor Law § 240 (1) and denied its cross motion for summary judgment dismissing that cause of action.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The injured plaintiff stepped backwards into an unprotected opening in the floor of a home he was renovating and fell from the ground floor to the basement. The plaintiffs established their prima facie entitlement to summary judgment on the issue of liability pursuant to Labor Law § 240 (1) by submitting evidence that the injured plaintiff fell through an uncovered opening, that no safety device was in place to protect him from the uncovered opening and that this violation was the proximate cause of the injuries he allegedly sustained (see Peter v Nisseli [656]*656Realty Co., 300 AD2d 289 [2002]). Contrary to the appellant’s contention, the accident was the result of an elevation-related hazard within the meaning of Labor Law § 240 (1) (see Rocovich v Consolidated Edison Co., 78 NY2d 509 [1991]; Lardaro v New York City Bldrs. Group, 271 AD2d 574 [2000]; Carpio v Tishman Constr. Corp. of N.Y., 240 AD2d 234 [1997]). Moreover, the injured plaintiff’s actions cannot be considered the sole proximate cause of the accident (see Clark v Fox Meadow Bldrs., 214 AD2d 882 [1995]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability pursuant to Labor Law § 240 (1) and denied the appellant’s cross motion for summary judgment dismissing that cause of action.

The appellant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Florio, J.P., Townes, Cozier and Mastro, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Estrella v. ZRHLE Holdings, LLC
192 N.Y.S.3d 645 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2023)
Zoto v. 259 W. 10th, LLC
2020 NY Slip Op 07949 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
Xiaoen Xie v. Park Place Estate, LLC
2020 NY Slip Op 1522 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
Yiming Zhou v. 828 Hamilton, Inc.
2019 NY Slip Op 4752 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
People v. Ultimate Homes, Inc.
2018 NY Slip Op 7468 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)
KING, III, JOSEPH v. MALONE HOME BUILDERS, INC.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016
King v. Malone Home Builders, Inc.
137 A.D.3d 1646 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
Andresky v. Wenger Construction Co.
95 A.D.3d 1247 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
Kamolov v. BIA Group, LLC
79 A.D.3d 1101 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
DeSabato v. 674 Carroll Street Corp.
55 A.D.3d 656 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)
Bonilla v. State
40 A.D.3d 673 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)
Sickler v. City of New York
15 Misc. 3d 48 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)
Valensisi v. Greens At Half Hollow, LLC
33 A.D.3d 693 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)
O'Connor v. Enright Marble & Tile Corp.
22 A.D.3d 548 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2005)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
7 A.D.3d 655, 777 N.Y.S.2d 511, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brandl-v-ram-builders-inc-nyappdiv-2004.