Preldakaj v. Gazivoda

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Preldakaj v. Gazivoda

235 A.D.2d 367, 652 N.Y.S.2d 975, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 731

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

DecidedJanuary 30, 1997

StatusPublished

This text of 235 A.D.2d 367 (Preldakaj v. Gazivoda) 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

Preldakaj v. Gazivoda, 235 A.D.2d 367, 652 N.Y.S.2d 975, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 731 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Alan Saks, J.), entered November 2, 1995, which denied plaintiffs motion for partial summary judgment on his causes of action under Labor Law § 240 (1) and § 241 (6), and granted defendants’ cross motion for partial summary judgment dismissing those causes of action, unanimously affirmed, without costs. Order, same court (Stanley Green, J.), entered April 9, 1996, which granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing plaintiffs cause of action for common-law negligence, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, the motion denied and plaintiff’s cause of action for common-law negligence reinstated.

Plaintiff’s Labor Law claims were properly dismissed. However, plaintiff’s sworn statements that the accident was caused by improperly secured scaffolding that defendant had supplied and had assisted in installing raise issues of fact as to the cause of action for common-law negligence (see, Communications & Entertainment Corp. v Hibbard Brown & Co., 202 AD2d 191), and we accordingly reinstate that cause of action. Concur—Milonas, J. P., Ellerin, Rubin and Mazzarelli, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Alan Saks, J.), entered November 2, 1995, which denied plaintiffs motion for partial summary judgment on his causes of action under Labor Law § 240 (1) and § 241 (6), and granted defendants’ cross motion for partial summary judgment dismissing those causes of action, unanimously affirmed, without costs. Order, same court (Stanley Green, J.), entered April 9, 1996, which granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing plaintiffs cause of action for common-law negligence, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, the motion denied and plaintiff’s cause of action for common-law negligence reinstated.

Plaintiff’s Labor Law claims were properly dismissed. However, plaintiff’s sworn statements that the accident was caused by improperly secured scaffolding that defendant had supplied and had assisted in installing raise issues of fact as to the cause of action for common-law negligence (see, Communications & Entertainment Corp. v Hibbard Brown & Co., 202 AD2d 191), and we accordingly reinstate that cause of action. Concur—Milonas, J. P., Ellerin, Rubin and Mazzarelli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

235 A.D.2d 367, 652 N.Y.S.2d 975, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 731, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/preldakaj-v-gazivoda-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack