Merlo v. LCOR 55 Bank St. LLC
This text of 2024 NY Slip Op 01875 (Merlo v. LCOR 55 Bank St. LLC) 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.
Opinion
| Merlo v LCOR 55 Bank St. LLC |
| 2024 NY Slip Op 01875 |
| Decided on April 04, 2024 |
| Appellate Division, First Department |
| Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. |
| This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports. |
Decided and Entered: April 04, 2024
Before: Renwick, P.J., Manzanet-Daniels, Kennedy, Mendez, Michael, JJ.
Index No. 152443/17 Appeal No. 1967-1968-1969-1970 Case No. 2023-00904, 2023-00907, 2023-00908, 2023-00909
v
LCOR 55 Bank Street LLC, et al., Defendants-Respondents, Ecker Window Corp., et al., Defendants.
Sacks & Sacks LLP, New York (Scott N. Singer of counsel), for appellant.
Black Marjieh & Sanford LLP, Elmsford (Steven R. Lau of counsel), for LCOR 55 Bank Street LLC, LCOR Incorporated, WP North Tower, LLC and LRC Construction LLC, respondents.
Ahmuty, Demers & McManus, Albertson (Nicholas P. Calabria of counsel), for Precision Carpentry of Westchester, Inc., respondent.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Frank P. Nervo, J.), entered January 9, 2023, which denied plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment on liability, unanimously affirmed, without costs. Appeals from orders, same court and Justice, entered January 9, 2023, which resolved certain discovery matters, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as abandoned.
Plaintiff is correct that the outstanding discovery did not warrant denial of his motion, as it concerned damages rather than liability. Nevertheless, the motion was properly denied on its merits since questions of fact exist as to whether plaintiff's fall occurred in a passageway so as to implicate Industrial Code (12 NYCRR) § 23-1.7(e)(1) (see Pawlicki v 200 Park, L.P., 199 AD3d 578, 579 [1st Dept 2021]; Prevost v One City Block LLC, 155 AD3d 531, 535 [1st Dept 2017]). Regarding plaintiff's Labor Law § 200 and common-law negligence claims, questions of fact exist as to whether defendants had notice of the condition that allegedly caused plaintiff's fall (see Coon v WFP Tower B Co. L.P., 220 AD3d 407, 408-409 [1st Dept 2023]). THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER
OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.
ENTERED: April 4, 2024
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2024 NY Slip Op 01875, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/merlo-v-lcor-55-bank-st-llc-nyappdiv-2024.