Home/New York Court of Appeals/Heil v. F & M Schaefer Brewing Co.

Heil v. F & M Schaefer Brewing Co.

346 N.E.2d 824, 38 N.Y.2d 935, 382 N.Y.S.2d 986, 1976 N.Y. LEXIS 2368
CourtNew York Court of Appeals
DecidedFebruary 26, 1976
StatusPublished
Cited by13 cases

This text of 346 N.E.2d 824 (Heil v. F & M Schaefer Brewing Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Heil v. F & M Schaefer Brewing Co., 346 N.E.2d 824, 38 N.Y.2d 935, 382 N.Y.S.2d 986, 1976 N.Y. LEXIS 2368 (N.Y. 1976).

Opinion

Memorandum. The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed. None of the alleged errors warrant reversal.

Adam Heil, an Armor Elevator Company employee, was injured in a fall from a vertical ladder, claimed to have been positioned improperly, which served as sole access to the upper roof of defendant’s Brooklyn brewery. From that level a stairway led directly to the elevator motor room. Use of both the ladder and the stairway was required in order to ascend from the roof to the motor room, two levels above.

The trial court correctly recognized the questions of fact, including, inter alia, those relating to section 200 of the Labor Law, and properly placed them before the jury. Further, by testimony describing and photographs depicting the sole mode of access to the elevator motor room, the record reveals that the court was correct, both factually and legally, in charging that violations of pertinent provisions of the Administrative Code of the City of New York and of the Industrial Code of the State of New York could be considered by the jury as some evidence of defendant’s negligence (see Major v Waverly & Ogden, 7 NY2d 332, 336; 1 Warren’s Negligence, §§ 8.03, 9.01, 9.02).

[937]*937Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Cooke concur.

Order affirmed, with costs, in memorandum.

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

Related

People v. Acevedo (Miriam)
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016
In re the Claim of Barnes
195 A.D.2d 745 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1993)
McCullough v. Gardner
187 A.D.2d 937 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)
In re the Claim of Gaines
180 A.D.2d 996 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)
Lombardi v. Stout
178 A.D.2d 208 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1991)
In re the Claim of Montuori
176 A.D.2d 982 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1991)
In re the Claim of Thomas Sligh
174 A.D.2d 920 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1991)
In re the Claim of Kreppel
173 A.D.2d 1001 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1991)
In re the Claim of Lawson
151 A.D.2d 868 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1989)
Martin v. Kiendl Construction Co.
438 N.E.2d 1187 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1982)
Torrie v. Virtuoso Building Co.
58 A.D.2d 982 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1977)
Utility Workers of America v. Public Employment Relations Board
352 N.E.2d 581 (New York Court of Appeals, 1976)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
346 N.E.2d 824, 38 N.Y.2d 935, 382 N.Y.S.2d 986, 1976 N.Y. LEXIS 2368, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/heil-v-f-m-schaefer-brewing-co-ny-1976.