Siguencia v. City of New York

138 A.D.3d 605, 28 N.Y.S.3d 861

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Frank P. Ñervo, J.), entered on or about December 5, 2014, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted the City’s motion for summary judgment dismissing plaintiff’s Labor Law §§ 240 and 241 claims, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion denied.

The City concedes that the court improperly dismissed the Labor Law §§ 240 and 241 claims on the ground that the City was an out-of-possession landlord, since the statutes impose liability on property owners without regard to the owner’s degree of supervision or control over the premises (Gordon v Eastern Ry. Supply, 82 NY2d 555, 559-560 [1993]; Celestine v City of New York, 86 AD2d 592 [2d Dept 1982], affd 59 NY2d 938 [1983]).

Concur — Sweeny, J.P, Saxe, Moskowitz, Gische and Webber, JJ.