Roman v. Hudson Telegraph Associates

11 A.D.3d 346, 784 N.Y.S.2d 31, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12384
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Roman v. Hudson Telegraph Associates. Read the opinion of the Court — 15 A.D.3d 227

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Leland DeGrasse, J), entered August 13, 2003, which, to the extent appealed from, granted plaintiff summary judgment under Labor Law § 240 (1), unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The ladder used by plaintiff, which was owned by his employer, failed in its “core objective” of preventing him from falling to the cement floor below (Ross v Curtis-Palmer Hydro-Elec. Co., 81 NY2d 494, 501 [1993]). Inasmuch as defendant property owner presented no evidence to contradict the version of events testified to by plaintiff, the only inference to be drawn is that failure to provide plaintiff with a ladder adequate for its intended purpose was a proximate cause of his injuries (see Hernandez v 151 Sullivan Tenant Corp., 307 AD2d 207 [2003]). This failure is sufficient to establish liability under section 240 (1) (see Montalvo v J. Petrocelli Constr., 8 AD3d 173 [2004]). Concur—Buckley, P.J., Mazzarelli, Andrias, Marlow and Catterson, JJ.

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

Roman v. Hudson Telegraph Associates, 11 A.D.3d 346, 784 N.Y.S.2d 31, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12384 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

11 A.D.3d 346 (Roman v. Hudson Telegraph Associates) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Ross v. Curtis-Palmer Hydro-Electric Co.
618 N.E.2d 82 (New York Court of Appeals, 1993)
Montalvo v. J. Petrocelli Construction, Inc.
8 A.D.3d 173 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2004)
Hernandez v. 151 Sullivan Tenant Corp.
307 A.D.2d 207 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)