Sullivan v Flynn

Summary

The Appellate Division, Third Department reversed an order granting defendants summary judgment in a negligence and Labor Law § 200 action. The court held that factual questions remained as to whether a wooden construction brace placed in the middle of a kitchen constituted a dangerous condition and whether the worksite was maintained in a reasonably safe condition. The brace's open and obvious nature negated any duty to warn but did not, standing alone, eliminate defendants' duty to maintain a reasonably safe worksite.

Holdings

1. Defendants were not entitled to summary judgment because questions of fact remained as to whether placing the wooden brace in the middle of the kitchen constituted a dangerous condition and whether defendants maintained the worksite in a reasonably safe condition.
2. The open and obvious nature of the wooden brace did not, standing alone, eliminate defendants' duty to maintain the worksite in a reasonably safe condition; it negated only any duty to warn of the potentially dangerous condition.
3. Plaintiff's testimony that he had seen the brace before his fall did not defeat his claim as a matter of law; his prior knowledge could be considered by the jury in assessing comparative negligence.

Questions Presented

1. Whether defendants were entitled to summary judgment on plaintiff's common-law negligence and Labor Law § 200 claims on the ground that the wooden construction brace did not constitute a dangerous condition.
2. Whether the open and obvious nature of the brace and plaintiff's prior observation of it eliminated defendants' duty to maintain the worksite in a reasonably safe condition or defeated plaintiff's claim as a matter of law.

Disposition

reversed