Stejskal v. Simons

New York Court of Appeals

Stejskal v. Simons

816 N.E.2d 186, 3 N.Y.3d 628, 782 N.Y.S.2d 397, 2004 N.Y. LEXIS 1574

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedJune 24, 2004

StatusPublished

Cited by12 cases

This text of 816 N.E.2d 186 (Stejskal v. Simons) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Stejskal v. Simons, 816 N.E.2d 186, 3 N.Y.3d 628, 782 N.Y.S.2d 397, 2004 N.Y. LEXIS 1574 (N.Y. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs. The evidence unequivocally demonstrated that the sole purpose of the construction work was to convert what was a multiple dwelling into a one-family dwelling for the owners’ use. Thus, defendant owners were entitled to avail themselves of the one- or two-family homeowner’s exemption provided in Labor Law § 240 (1) and § 241 (see Khela v Neiger, 85 NY2d 333, 338 [1995]; Cannon v Putnam, 76 NY2d 644, 650 [1990]).

Chief Judge Kaye and Judges G.B. Smith, Ciparick, Rosenblatt, Graffeo, Read and R.S. Smith concur.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.4), order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.

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