Summary
The Appellate Division, Second Department modified and affirmed an order granting partial summary judgment in a consolidated personal injury action stemming from a construction site accident. The court reversed the lower court's dismissal of the plaintiff's common-law negligence and Labor Law § 200 claims, holding that the defendants failed to prove as a matter of law that the hazardous water and mud conditions were inherent to the plaintiff's assigned tasks. Conversely, the court affirmed the dismissal of the Labor Law § 241(6) claim related to 12 NYCRR 23-1.7(d), determining that the industrial code provision governing floors and walkways was inapplicable to the plaintiff's fall in standing water.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the defendants owed a duty of care under common‑law negligence and Labor Law §200 when the hazardous condition was inherent to the work the plaintiff was hired to perform.
- Whether summary judgment was proper on the Labor Law §241(6) claim predicated on 12 NYCRR 23‑1.7(d).
Holdings
- The appellate court reversed the trial court’s grant of summary judgment dismissing the negligence and Labor Law §200 claims, holding that the defendants owed a duty of care and summary judgment was improper.
- The court affirmed the trial court’s grant of summary judgment dismissing the Labor Law §241(6) claim because the plaintiff was not using a floor, passageway, or walkway contemplated by the regulation.
Key quotations
“"The duty, however, is subject to recognized exceptions. It does not extend to hazards which are part of or inherent in the very work which the contractor is to perform, or where the [workers] are engaged for the specific purpose of repairing the defect"”
Factual background
The plaintiff, an employee of ECD NY, Inc., was excavating a construction site when he struck a piece of wood with a sledgehammer. The excavation area was filled with water and mud; his feet became stuck, causing him to lose balance and fall, sustaining injuries.
Procedural history
The trial court granted summary judgment on the negligence and Labor Law §200 causes of action and partially on the Labor Law §241(6) claim. The appellant appealed the order.
Remand instructions
The order is modified to deny the defendants’ summary‑judgment motion on the common‑law negligence and Labor Law §200 causes of action; the summary‑judgment dismissal of the Labor Law §241(6) claim is affirmed.