Cabrera v. Provident Alpine Partners, L.P.

Cabrera v. Provident Alpine Partners, L.P. 2025 NY Slip Op 03700 · Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department · June 18, 2025 · No. Index No. 611745/19

Summary

This New York Appellate Division decision reviews a trial court's summary judgment rulings in a personal injury action brought by a construction worker who fell from a ladder during renovation work. The appellate court affirmed the denial of the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on Labor Law § 240(1) liability but reversed the trial court's grant of summary judgment dismissing that claim, finding a triable issue of fact regarding whether the plaintiff needed gravity protection or was the sole proximate cause. Additionally, the court reversed the dismissal of the Labor Law § 241(6) claim, holding that the defendant failed to establish prima facie entitlement to judgment as the owner's nondelegable duty applies regardless of direct worksite control.

Court
Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
Writing for the Court
Betsy Barros, J.P.; Robert J. Miller; Deborah A. Dowling; Lourdes M. Ventura, JJ.
Jurisdiction
New York
Decision date
June 18, 2025
Docket number
Index No. 611745/19
Procedural posture
Appeal from order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County denying plaintiff's summary‑judgment motion on Labor Law §240(1) and granting defendant's cross‑motion for summary judgment dismissing claims under §§240(1) and 241(6).
Precedential value
Published
Parties
Luis Cabrera, et al. v. Provident Alpine Partners, L.P.
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

construction defectsconstruction lawpersonal injurytorts

Practice areas

tortsconstruction lawemployment lawappellate procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether summary judgment was proper on the liability claim under Labor Law §240(1).
  2. Whether summary judgment was proper on the liability claim under Labor Law §241(6).

Holdings

  1. Summary judgment was improper; the trial court should have denied the defendant's cross‑motion because genuine issues of fact existed as to whether the plaintiff needed protection from gravity and whether his own actions were the sole proximate cause of his injuries.
  2. Summary judgment was improper; the owner’s nondelegable duty under §241(6) was not disproved, and the plaintiff presented sufficient evidence of an unsafe ladder and footing.

Key quotations

Labor Law § 240(1) imposes a nondelegable duty upon owners and general contractors and their agents to provide safety devices necessary to protect workers from risks inherent in elevated work sites.
[A] plaintiff may establish prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by showing both that he or she fell from a defective or unsecured ladder, and that the defect or failure to secure the ladder was a proximate cause of his or her injuries.

Factual background

Luis Cabrera, a construction worker employed by Loyal Stars Construction, was injured when he fell from an aluminum A‑frame ladder while demolishing a wall in an apartment building owned by Provident Alpine Partners. The injury occurred during a task that may not have required ladder use, and the condition of the ladder and its footing were disputed.

Procedural history

Plaintiffs filed a personal‑injury action in the Supreme Court, Nassau County. The trial court denied the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment on the liability claim under Labor Law §240(1) and granted the defendant's cross‑motion dismissing the §240(1) and §241(6) claims. The plaintiffs appealed to the Appellate Division, Second Department.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…