Hammond v. Alekna Construction, Inc.

224 A.D.2d 1039, 637 N.Y.S.2d 948, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1776
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided February 2, 1996·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

—Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly dismissed plaintiffs Labor Law § 241 (6) causes of action against defendants Alekna Construction, Inc., StetsonHarza, Inc., also known as Harza Northeast, Inc., and Joseph A. Giruzzi, Inc., doing business as Joseph A. Giruzzi & Son. At the time she was allegedly injured, plaintiff was working as a secretary for the Utica City School District and, therefore, was "not engaged in a protected activity within Labor Law * * * § 241 (6)” (Warsaw v Eastern Rock Prods., 193 AD2d 1115; see, Jock v Fien, 80 NY2d 965, 967; Mordkofsky v V.C.V. Dev. Corp., 76 NY2d 573, 576-577; Malczewski v Cannon Design, 125 AD2d 941, 942). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Oneida County, Tenney, J. — Labor Law.) Present — Pine, J. P., Wesley, Callahan, Davis and Boehm, JJ.

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

Hammond v. Alekna Construction, Inc., 224 A.D.2d 1039, 637 N.Y.S.2d 948, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1776 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

224 A.D.2d 1039 (Hammond v. Alekna Construction, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Bieber v. A & B Wholesale
291 A.D.2d 936 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002)