From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cosgriff v. Manshul Construction Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 5, 1997
239 A.D.2d 312 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)

Opinion

May 5, 1997

Appeal from Supreme Court, Richmond County (Leone, J.),


Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with one bill of costs, and the plaintiffs motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of liability under Labor Law § 240 (1) is granted.

The plaintiff established his entitlement to judgment as a matter of law on the issue of liability under Labor Law § 240 (1). The circumstantial evidence presented clearly indicated that the plaintiff, at ground level, was hit in the head by an object which came from the roof of a building on a construction site at which he was working, and that no safety devices were provided which would have possibly prevented this accident ( see, Zimmer v. Chemung County Performing Arts, 65 N.Y.2d 513; Keane v. Sin Hang Lee, 188 A.D.2d 636; Santos v. Sure Iron Works, 166 A.D.2d 571). The defendant failed to present any evidence which would raise any questions of fact requiring the denial of summary judgment.

Rosenblatt, J.P., Sullivan, Pizzuto and Friedmann, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Cosgriff v. Manshul Construction Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 5, 1997
239 A.D.2d 312 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
Case details for

Cosgriff v. Manshul Construction Corp.

Case Details

Full title:EDWARD COSGRIFF, Appellant, v. MANSHUL CONSTRUCTION CORP., Defendant and…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: May 5, 1997

Citations

239 A.D.2d 312 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
657 N.Y.S.2d 999

Citing Cases

ZHONG v. FATE REALTY

NYCIDA also argues that the claims against it under Labor Law § 240 and § 241 should be dismissed as it is…

Zervos v. City of New York

"To come within the ambit of the statute, the injured plaintiff must show that an object fell `while being…