Skinner v. G & T Realty Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Skinner v. G & T Realty Corp.

232 A.D.2d 627, 648 N.Y.S.2d 687, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11387

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

DecidedOctober 28, 1996

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 232 A.D.2d 627 (Skinner v. G & T Realty Corp.) 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

Skinner v. G & T Realty Corp., 232 A.D.2d 627, 648 N.Y.S.2d 687, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11387 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant third-party plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (I. Aronin, J.), dated November 22, 1995, which denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the motion is granted.

The plaintiff brought this action to recover damages for personal injuries he allegedly sustained from a defective window while he was replacing windows on the appellant’s premises. The plaintiff cannot recover against the appellant under common-law negligence or Labor Law § 200, since he was injured through the dangerous condition which he had undertaken to fix (see, Kowalsky v Conreco Co., 264 NY 125; Sanders v TDX Constr. Corp., 203 AD2d 353; McCullum v Barrington Co. & 309 56th St. Co., 192 AD2d 489). In addition, there is no evidence that the appellant exercised any supervisory control or had any input into how the plaintiff’s work was performed (see, Lombardi v Stout, 80 NY2d 290). Bracken, J. P., Copertino, Joy, Florio and McGinity, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant third-party plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (I. Aronin, J.), dated November 22, 1995, which denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the motion is granted.

The plaintiff brought this action to recover damages for personal injuries he allegedly sustained from a defective window while he was replacing windows on the appellant’s premises. The plaintiff cannot recover against the appellant under common-law negligence or Labor Law § 200, since he was injured through the dangerous condition which he had undertaken to fix (see, Kowalsky v Conreco Co., 264 NY 125; Sanders v TDX Constr. Corp., 203 AD2d 353; McCullum v Barrington Co. & 309 56th St. Co., 192 AD2d 489). In addition, there is no evidence that the appellant exercised any supervisory control or had any input into how the plaintiff’s work was performed (see, Lombardi v Stout, 80 NY2d 290). Bracken, J. P., Copertino, Joy, Florio and McGinity, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

232 A.D.2d 627, 648 N.Y.S.2d 687, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11387, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/skinner-v-g-t-realty-corp-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack