Parrelli v. City of New York

277 A.D.2d 167, 716 N.Y.S.2d 308, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12402
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedNovember 30, 2000
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 277 A.D.2d 167 (Parrelli v. City of New York) 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
Parrelli v. City of New York, 277 A.D.2d 167, 716 N.Y.S.2d 308, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12402 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Phyllis Gangel-Jacob, J.), entered January 19, 2000, which, to the extent appealed from, granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing plaintiffs’ claims alleging violations of Labor Law § 241 (6) and § 200 and common law negligence, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, the motion denied and the Labor Law § 241 (6) and § 200 claims reinstated.

Plaintiffs’ Labor Law § 241 (6) claim is predicated on a violation of 12 NYCRR 23-9.4 (e). The regulation sets forth sufficiently specific requirements governing the movement of materials with a backhoe (in this case a concrete median barrier) to constitute a standard for the imposition of statutory liability (see, Brechue v Town of Wheatfield, 241 AD2d 935, lv denied 94 NY2d 759). Whether the alleged violation of the safety standard was a proximate cause of plaintiff’s injuries merely presents a question of fact for resolution at trial.

As noted by this Court, “Labor Law § 200 codifies the common-law duty of an owner or employer to furnish employees with a safe place to work” (Gonzalez v Stern’s Dept. Stores, 211 AD2d 414). The record is insufficient to establish the absence of supervisory control by defendant City of New York over the work performed by plaintiff and, therefore, defendant has not met its burden to eliminate any material issue of fact [168]*168so as to establish its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law (Winegrad v New York Univ. Med. Ctr., 64 NY2d 851, 853). Concur — Sullivan, P. J., Rosenberger, Ellerin, Wallach and Rubin, JJ.

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

Related

Padilla v. Frances Schervier Housing Development Fund Corp.
303 A.D.2d 194 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
277 A.D.2d 167, 716 N.Y.S.2d 308, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12402, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/parrelli-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-2000.