Summary
The Appellate Division, Second Department, reversed an order granting the State summary judgment on the claimant’s Labor Law § 241(6) claim predicated on Industrial Code § 23-9.7(e). The court held that the State failed to establish prima facie that the truck was stationary or otherwise demonstrate that the regulation was inapplicable to the claimant’s alleged injury while exiting a moving box truck.
Holdings
- The State failed to establish prima facie that the truck was stationary at the time of the accident or otherwise demonstrate that Industrial Code § 23-9.7(e) was inapplicable.
- The branch of the State's summary-judgment motion seeking dismissal of the Labor Law § 241(6) claim predicated on Industrial Code § 23-9.7(e) should have been denied.
Questions Presented
- Whether the State established as a matter of law that Industrial Code § 23-9.7(e), governing riding on trucks and similar vehicles, was inapplicable because the truck was stationary at the time of the accident.
- Whether the State was entitled to summary judgment dismissing the Labor Law § 241(6) claim predicated on Industrial Code § 23-9.7(e).
Disposition
reversed
Cases Cited (7)
- Ochoa v JEM Real Estate Co., LLC, 223 AD3d 747, 749(followed)
- Guoxing Song v CA Plaza, LLC, 208 AD3d 760, 761(followed)
- Cadena v Kupferstein, 238 AD3d 973, 975(followed)
- Bayron Chay Mo v Ultra Dimension Place, LLC, 236 AD3d 721(followed)
- Valerio v City of New York, 238 AD3d 945, 947(followed)
- Zeldin v Larose, 223 AD3d 858, 858(followed)
- Wetter v Northville Indus. Corp., 185 AD3d 874, 875(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…