O'Brien v. Triburough Bridge & Tunnel Authority

17 A.D.3d 105, 793 N.Y.S.2d 24, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3440
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedApril 5, 2005
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 17 A.D.3d 105 (O'Brien v. Triburough Bridge & Tunnel Authority) 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
O'Brien v. Triburough Bridge & Tunnel Authority, 17 A.D.3d 105, 793 N.Y.S.2d 24, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3440 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Opinion

[106]*106Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Janice L. Bowman, J.), entered April 21, 2004, which denied defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously modified, on the law, to grant the motion insofar as to dismiss plaintiffs Labor Law § 240 (1), § 200 and common-law negligence claims, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

Inasmuch as the record shows that plaintiff sustained the complained-of injury when his wrist became stuck against an iron beam, i.e., in an accident in which elevation differentials played no significant role, and not as a result of his subsequent fall from his work position onto safety netting, summary judgment dismissing his Labor Law § 240 (1) claim should have been granted (see Narducci v Manhasset Bay Assoc., 96 NY2d 259, 269 [2001]). Summary judgment should have been granted as well dismissing plaintiffs Labor Law § 200 and common-law negligence claims since the record is devoid of evidence that defendant exercised any direct control over the injury-producing work (see Rizzuto v L.A. Wenger Contr. Co., 91 NY2d 343, 352 [1998]).

The motion court, however, properly found triable issues as to whether defendant permitted the wooden block upon which plaintiff was working to become slippery in violation of 12 NYCRR 23-1.7 (d) with resultant injury to plaintiff, thus precluding dismissal of the Labor Law § 241 (6) claim. Concur— Buckley, EJ., Tom, Andrias, Friedman and Sullivan, JJ.

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

Related

Gasques v. State
59 A.D.3d 666 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)
Carty v. Port Authority of New York & New Jersey
32 A.D.3d 732 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
17 A.D.3d 105, 793 N.Y.S.2d 24, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3440, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/obrien-v-triburough-bridge-tunnel-authority-nyappdiv-2005.