Dellavalle v. E.W. Howell Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Dellavalle v. E.W. Howell Co.

260 A.D.2d 194, 688 N.Y.S.2d 44, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3635

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

DecidedApril 8, 1999

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 260 A.D.2d 194 (Dellavalle v. E.W. Howell Co.) 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

Dellavalle v. E.W. Howell Co., 260 A.D.2d 194, 688 N.Y.S.2d 44, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3635 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Louise Gruner-Gans, J.), entered on or about October 6, 1998, which, insofar as appealed from, granted plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment on his cause of action under Labor Law § 240 (1), unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Third-party defendant, Fischbach and Moore, plaintiff’s employer, has standing to bring this appeal (see, Fitch v Turner Constr. Co., 241 AD2d 166, 172). We agree with the IAS Court that plaintiff made out a prima facie case under Labor Law § 240 (1) by proof that he was ejected from the aerial bucket in which he was working when the boom to which the bucket was attached suddenly dropped and came back up. Whatever the [195]*195cause of such malfunction, plaintiff is entitled to summary judgment absent any evidence that the failure to provide a safe bucket was not a substantial cause of his injuries (see, Gordon v Eastern Ry. Supply, 82 NY2d 555, 561-562). Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Nardelli, Williams and Wallach, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Louise Gruner-Gans, J.), entered on or about October 6, 1998, which, insofar as appealed from, granted plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment on his cause of action under Labor Law § 240 (1), unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Third-party defendant, Fischbach and Moore, plaintiff’s employer, has standing to bring this appeal (see, Fitch v Turner Constr. Co., 241 AD2d 166, 172). We agree with the IAS Court that plaintiff made out a prima facie case under Labor Law § 240 (1) by proof that he was ejected from the aerial bucket in which he was working when the boom to which the bucket was attached suddenly dropped and came back up. Whatever the [195]*195cause of such malfunction, plaintiff is entitled to summary judgment absent any evidence that the failure to provide a safe bucket was not a substantial cause of his injuries (see, Gordon v Eastern Ry. Supply, 82 NY2d 555, 561-562). Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Nardelli, Williams and Wallach, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

260 A.D.2d 194, 688 N.Y.S.2d 44, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3635, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dellavalle-v-ew-howell-co-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack