Lanza v. Cohen

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Lanza v. Cohen

236 A.D.2d 287, 653 N.Y.S.2d 583, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1430

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

DecidedFebruary 20, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 236 A.D.2d 287 (Lanza v. Cohen) 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

Lanza v. Cohen, 236 A.D.2d 287, 653 N.Y.S.2d 583, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1430 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Sheila Abdus-Salaam, J.), entered on or about April 18, 1995, which, inter alia, denied defendants’ motion for summary judgment and granted plaintiffs cross motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability under Labor Law § 240 (1) and set the matter down for assessment of damages and severed the third-party action, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The record establishes that defendants, as a matter of law, failed to "give proper protection” to plaintiff and that the violation of Labor Law § 240 (1) was the proximate cause of plaintiff’s injuries. Plaintiff was directed to lower a scaffold several stories down to his foreman. The scaffold was not secured to anything other than plaintiff’s body. As the motion court correctly found, plaintiff’s "body became a counterweight to the scaffold and his body had to be used to keep the scaffold (and himself) from plummeting down onto his boss” or the ground below. In the course of using his body in this way and in an attempt to brace his fall, plaintiff’s knee "popped” and he severed a ligament. The "risk” or "special hazard” of being pulled off the roof and being injured in the absence of "proper protection” is among the "risks related to elevation differentials” to which Labor Law § 240 (1) applies (Rocovich v Consolidated Edison Co., 78 NY2d 509, 514).

The court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in severing the third-party action. Concur—Milonas, J. P., Rosenberger, Wallach and Nardelli, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Sheila Abdus-Salaam, J.), entered on or about April 18, 1995, which, inter alia, denied defendants’ motion for summary judgment and granted plaintiffs cross motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability under Labor Law § 240 (1) and set the matter down for assessment of damages and severed the third-party action, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The record establishes that defendants, as a matter of law, failed to "give proper protection” to plaintiff and that the violation of Labor Law § 240 (1) was the proximate cause of plaintiff’s injuries. Plaintiff was directed to lower a scaffold several stories down to his foreman. The scaffold was not secured to anything other than plaintiff’s body. As the motion court correctly found, plaintiff’s "body became a counterweight to the scaffold and his body had to be used to keep the scaffold (and himself) from plummeting down onto his boss” or the ground below. In the course of using his body in this way and in an attempt to brace his fall, plaintiff’s knee "popped” and he severed a ligament. The "risk” or "special hazard” of being pulled off the roof and being injured in the absence of "proper protection” is among the "risks related to elevation differentials” to which Labor Law § 240 (1) applies (Rocovich v Consolidated Edison Co., 78 NY2d 509, 514).

The court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in severing the third-party action. Concur—Milonas, J. P., Rosenberger, Wallach and Nardelli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

236 A.D.2d 287, 653 N.Y.S.2d 583, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1430, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lanza-v-cohen-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack