Charles v. Summit Glory LLC

2020 NY Slip Op 1270, 119 N.Y.S.3d 462, 180 A.D.3d 572
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedFebruary 20, 2020
Docket11096 161044/17
StatusPublished

This text of 2020 NY Slip Op 1270 (Charles v. Summit Glory LLC) 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
Charles v. Summit Glory LLC, 2020 NY Slip Op 1270, 119 N.Y.S.3d 462, 180 A.D.3d 572 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2020).

Opinion

Charles v Summit Glory LLC (2020 NY Slip Op 01270)
Charles v Summit Glory LLC
2020 NY Slip Op 01270
Decided on February 20, 2020
Appellate Division, First Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.


Decided on February 20, 2020
Renwick, J.P., Mazzarelli, Gesmer, Kern, JJ.

11096 161044/17

[*1] Joseph Charles, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v

Summit Glory LLC, et al., Defendants-Respondents.


Kazmierczuk & McGrath, Forest Hills (Joseph Kazmierczuk of counsel), for appellant.

Cullen & Dykman LLP, New York (Wayne M. Cox of counsel), for respondents.



Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Arlene P. Bluth, J.), entered January 24, 2019, which, insofar as appealed from, granted defendants' motion to dismiss the Labor Law § 241(6) cause of action predicated upon Industrial Code (12 NYCRR) § 23-1.10(a), unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff was injured when his right forearm was struck by a metal shard that flew from the "mushroomed" head of a "drift pin" that a coworker was hammering with a sledgehammer. A drift pin is a tapered metal hand tool that is hammered into the holes of steel beams to align them, and once the holes are aligned, the drift pin is removed and a bolt is put through the holes to secure the beams. According to defendants' proof, the subject drift pin was about one foot long, one inch in diameter and "round."

Plaintiff claims that defendants violated 12 NYCRR 23-1.l0(a), which provides that "[e]dged tools shall be kept sharp and shall be maintained free from burrs and mushroomed heads." We have previously found the regulation inapplicable to tools that have "flat and/or round edges" (Pol v City of New York, 126 AD3d 526, 526 [1st Dept 2015], lv denied 25 NY3d 912 [2015]), and since plaintiff has not submitted any proof showing that the drift pin was a tool with a sharp edge, the claim was properly dismissed.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER

OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: FEBRUARY 20, 2020

CLERK



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

Related

Pol v. City of New York
126 A.D.3d 526 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2020 NY Slip Op 1270, 119 N.Y.S.3d 462, 180 A.D.3d 572, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/charles-v-summit-glory-llc-nyappdiv-2020.