Katisfarakis v. Central School District No. 1

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Katisfarakis v. Central School District No. 1

201 A.D.2d 622, 609 N.Y.S.2d 833, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1457

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided February 22, 1994·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Rutledge, J.), entered January 21, 1992, which, inter alia, granted the motions of the defendant and the third-party defendant for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and the third-party complaint, respectively.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs to the respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs.

The record reveals that the injured plaintiff fell from the fourth or fifth step of the A-frame ladder provided for his use by the defendant school district. However, no evidence was presented tending to demonstrate that the ladder in question was not adequate under the circumstances to provide the [623]*623injured plaintiff with "proper protection” within the meaning of Labor Law § 240 (1) (cf., Walsh v Applied Digital Data Sys., 190 AD2d 731). Thompson, J. P., Rosenblatt, Ritter, Friedmann and Krausman, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Rutledge, J.), entered January 21, 1992, which, inter alia, granted the motions of the defendant and the third-party defendant for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and the third-party complaint, respectively.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs to the respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs.

The record reveals that the injured plaintiff fell from the fourth or fifth step of the A-frame ladder provided for his use by the defendant school district. However, no evidence was presented tending to demonstrate that the ladder in question was not adequate under the circumstances to provide the [623]*623injured plaintiff with "proper protection” within the meaning of Labor Law § 240 (1) (cf., Walsh v Applied Digital Data Sys., 190 AD2d 731). Thompson, J. P., Rosenblatt, Ritter, Friedmann and Krausman, JJ., concur.

Katisfarakis v. Central School District No. 1, 201 A.D.2d 622, 609 N.Y.S.2d 833, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1457 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

201 A.D.2d 622 (Katisfarakis v. Central School District No. 1) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related