DeStefano v. Amtad New York, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

DeStefano v. Amtad New York, Inc.

269 A.D.2d 229, 703 N.Y.S.2d 34, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1535

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

DecidedFebruary 15, 2000

StatusPublished

Cited by8 cases

This text of 269 A.D.2d 229 (DeStefano v. Amtad New York, 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

DeStefano v. Amtad New York, Inc., 269 A.D.2d 229, 703 N.Y.S.2d 34, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1535 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward Lehner, J.), entered November 30, 1998, which in an action for personal injuries by a laborer against the owner and general contractor of a construction site, granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff, an electrician assigned to turn on the power at the construction site before the other trades arrived, and who was the first person to enter the site on the morning of the accident, has no cause of action under Labor Law § 241 (6) and 12 NYCRR 23-1.7 (d) absent any evidence tending to show that “someone within the chain of the construction project” had notice of the overnight accumulation of snow on the ramp on which he slipped (Rizzuto v Wenger Contr. Co., 91 NY2d 343, 350, 351). Nor does plaintiff have a cause of action under Labor Law § 240 (1) since the ramp, which was positioned at the entrance of the building and rose to a maximum of 12 inches, did not present an elevation hazard (see, Rocovich v Consolidated Edison Co., 78 NY2d 509, 514-515). Concur — Nardelli, J. P., Tom, Wallach, Rubin and Andrias, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward Lehner, J.), entered November 30, 1998, which in an action for personal injuries by a laborer against the owner and general contractor of a construction site, granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff, an electrician assigned to turn on the power at the construction site before the other trades arrived, and who was the first person to enter the site on the morning of the accident, has no cause of action under Labor Law § 241 (6) and 12 NYCRR 23-1.7 (d) absent any evidence tending to show that “someone within the chain of the construction project” had notice of the overnight accumulation of snow on the ramp on which he slipped (Rizzuto v Wenger Contr. Co., 91 NY2d 343, 350, 351). Nor does plaintiff have a cause of action under Labor Law § 240 (1) since the ramp, which was positioned at the entrance of the building and rose to a maximum of 12 inches, did not present an elevation hazard (see, Rocovich v Consolidated Edison Co., 78 NY2d 509, 514-515). Concur — Nardelli, J. P., Tom, Wallach, Rubin and Andrias, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

269 A.D.2d 229, 703 N.Y.S.2d 34, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1535, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/destefano-v-amtad-new-york-inc-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack