Martinsen v. County of Nassau

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Martinsen v. County of Nassau

249 A.D.2d 519, 671 N.Y.S.2d 355, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4609

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

DecidedApril 27, 1998

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 249 A.D.2d 519 (Martinsen v. County of Nassau) 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

Martinsen v. County of Nassau, 249 A.D.2d 519, 671 N.Y.S.2d 355, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4609 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (DiNoto, J.), dated April 18, 1997, as denied their motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of liability pursuant to Labor Law § 240 (1).

Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, and the motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of liability pursuant to Labor Law § 240 (1) is granted.

The collapse of a ladder that is not braced or secured in any way is a prima facie violation of Labor Law § 240 (1) (see, Chaitovitz, v Lewis, 222 AD2d 392, 393; Bryan v City of New York, 206 AD2d 448, 449; Vessio v Ador Converting & Biasing, 215 AD2d 648; Kinsler v Lu-Four Assocs., 215 AD2d 631). The defendant failed to submit evidence in admissible form to rebut this prima facie showing (see, Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557). Accordingly, the plaintiffs’ motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of liability pursuant to Labor Law § 240 (1) should have been granted. Bracken, J. P., Copertino, Santucci, Florio and McGinity, 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, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (DiNoto, J.), dated April 18, 1997, as denied their motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of liability pursuant to Labor Law § 240 (1).

Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, and the motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of liability pursuant to Labor Law § 240 (1) is granted.

The collapse of a ladder that is not braced or secured in any way is a prima facie violation of Labor Law § 240 (1) (see, Chaitovitz, v Lewis, 222 AD2d 392, 393; Bryan v City of New York, 206 AD2d 448, 449; Vessio v Ador Converting & Biasing, 215 AD2d 648; Kinsler v Lu-Four Assocs., 215 AD2d 631). The defendant failed to submit evidence in admissible form to rebut this prima facie showing (see, Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557). Accordingly, the plaintiffs’ motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of liability pursuant to Labor Law § 240 (1) should have been granted. Bracken, J. P., Copertino, Santucci, Florio and McGinity, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

249 A.D.2d 519, 671 N.Y.S.2d 355, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4609, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/martinsen-v-county-of-nassau-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack