Ortiz v. Igby Huntlaw LLC

2017 NY Slip Op 550, 146 A.D.3d 682, 49 N.Y.S.3d 17
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJanuary 26, 2017
Docket2873
StatusPublished

This text of 2017 NY Slip Op 550 (Ortiz v. Igby Huntlaw 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.

Bluebook
Ortiz v. Igby Huntlaw LLC, 2017 NY Slip Op 550, 146 A.D.3d 682, 49 N.Y.S.3d 17 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2017).

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Cynthia S. Kern, J.), entered on or about May 19, 2016, which denied defendant A.E. Greyson & Co., Inc.’s (Greyson) motion for summary judgment dismissing plaintiffs’ complaint, unanimously reversed, *683 on the law, without costs, and the motion granted. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly.

Plaintiff Wilson Ortiz, an employee of nonparty Uriu, LLC, was injured when he fell from a ladder while painting in an apartment owned by defendant Igby Huntlaw LLC, which was dismissed from plaintiffs’ action. Greyson was the general contractor, and its contract with Igby specifically excluded painting the apartment. Uriu was hired to do the painting.

Greyson is entitled to summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Where, as here, a plaintiff’s work at the time of his accident is outside the scope of what has been contracted for by the owner and the general contractor, the general contractor has no right to control the work, and therefore cannot be liable under Labor Law § 240 (1) or § 241 (6) (Butt v Bovis Lend Lease LMB, Inc., 47 AD3d 338, 340-341 [1st Dept 2007]). Because Greyson had no authority to control Ortiz’s injury-producing work, Ortiz’s common-law negligence and Labor Law § 200 claims must be dismissed (Williams v 7-31 Ltd. Partnership, 54 AD3d 586, 586-587 [1st Dept 2008]).

Plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of fact.

Given the dismissal of Ortiz’s claims, his wife’s derivative claim also must be dismissed.

Concur — Acosta, J.P., Mazzarelli, Feinman and Webber, JJ.

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

Related

Butt v. Bovis Lend Lease LMB, Inc.
47 A.D.3d 338 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)
Williams v. 7-31 Limited Partnership
54 A.D.3d 586 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2017 NY Slip Op 550, 146 A.D.3d 682, 49 N.Y.S.3d 17, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ortiz-v-igby-huntlaw-llc-nyappdiv-2017.