Baxter v. Jada Constr. & Dev., Inc.

Baxter v. Jada Constr. & Dev., Inc. 2025 NY Slip Op 03034 · Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department · May 21, 2025 · No. Index No. 51173/18

Summary

This Appellate Division, Second Department decision reverses a trial court's grant of summary judgment in favor of defendants in a consolidated personal injury action alleging common-law negligence and a violation of Labor Law § 200. The court found that the defendants failed to make a prima facie showing eliminating triable issues of fact regarding whether they created or had notice of a dangerous slope condition at a construction site. Additionally, the appellate court noted that the trial court improperly granted summary judgment based on an argument not raised by the moving parties. The matter is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this decision.

Court
Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
Writing for the Court
Barros, J.P.; Ford, J.P.; Love, J.P.; Hom, J.J.
Jurisdiction
New York
Decision date
May 21, 2025
Docket number
Index No. 51173/18
Procedural posture
Appeal from order of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County granting summary judgment dismissing the complaint against the defendants.
Precedential value
published
Parties
Shawn Baxter v. Jada Construction & Development, Inc.; Cambridge Heights Holdings, LLC
Disposition
reversed

Topics

negligencepremises liabilityconstruction defectssummary judgmentappellate procedure

Practice areas

tortsconstruction lawcivil procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether a defendant moving for summary judgment on a negligence claim and a Labor Law §200 claim must make a prima facie showing that it neither created the dangerous condition nor had actual or constructive notice of its existence
  2. Whether the trial court erred in granting summary judgment dismissing the plaintiff’s complaint

Holdings

  1. A defendant moving for summary judgment dismissing causes of action alleging common‑law negligence and a violation of Labor Law §200 must make a prima facie showing that it neither created the dangerous condition nor had actual or constructive notice of its existence.

Key quotations

Where, as here, a plaintiff contends that an accident occurred because a dangerous condition existed on the premises where the work was being undertaken, a defendant moving for summary judgment dismissing causes of action alleging common‑law negligence and a violation of Labor Law §200 must make a prima facie showing that it neither created the dangerous condition nor had actual or constructive notice of its existence.

Factual background

On April 4, 2016, while delivering a prefabricated fireplace to a semi‑attached condominium under construction, the plaintiff fell on a slope between two driveways that created a six‑ to seven‑inch height differential. The property was owned by Cambridge Heights Holdings, LLC, and the general contractor was Jada Construction, Inc.

Procedural history

The plaintiff filed personal injury actions against Cambridge Heights Holdings, LLC and Jada Construction, Inc./Jada Construction & Development, Inc. The trial court granted the defendants' motions for summary judgment, finding the slope on the property open and obvious, an issue not raised by the defendants. The appellant appealed.

Remand instructions

The order granting summary judgment is reversed and the motions for summary judgment are denied.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…