Russell v. Widewaters South Bay Road Associates, L. L. P.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Russell v. Widewaters South Bay Road Associates, L. L. P.

289 A.D.2d 1025, 735 N.Y.S.2d 900, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12633

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 21, 2001·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly granted that part of third-party defendant’s cross motion seeking summary judgment dismissing the Labor Law § 240 (1) claim. Plaintiff Dean Russell, a subcontractor, tripped over an electrical cord while working on stilts and, in doing so, “did not encounter a hazard contemplated by the statute” (Melber v 6333 Main St., 91 NY2d 759, 761). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Onondaga County, Nicholson, J. — Summary Judgment.) Present — Hayes, J. P., Scudder, Burns, Gorski and Lawton, JJ.

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

Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly granted that part of third-party defendant’s cross motion seeking summary judgment dismissing the Labor Law § 240 (1) claim. Plaintiff Dean Russell, a subcontractor, tripped over an electrical cord while working on stilts and, in doing so, “did not encounter a hazard contemplated by the statute” (Melber v 6333 Main St., 91 NY2d 759, 761). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Onondaga County, Nicholson, J. — Summary Judgment.) Present — Hayes, J. P., Scudder, Burns, Gorski and Lawton, JJ.

Russell v. Widewaters South Bay Road Associates, L. L. P., 289 A.D.2d 1025, 735 N.Y.S.2d 900, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12633 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

289 A.D.2d 1025 (Russell v. Widewaters South Bay Road Associates, L. L. P.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related