Opinion
May 13, 1985
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (DiPaola, J.).
Judgment affirmed, insofar as appealed from, with costs.
On a previous appeal concerning the instant matter, we held that "defendants are bound by any reasonable good-faith settlement made by the current plaintiff in the earlier action" ( Horn Constr. Co. v. MT Sec. Serv. Corp., 97 A.D.2d 786). After considering all of the facts presented in this record, we find that Horn has met its burden of proving that the settlement it entered into of the underlying action was reasonable. Moreover, ample evidence exists to support the jury's finding that Horn could have been found liable had it proceeded to trial in the underlying action.
Contrary to appellant's assertions, the trial court did not err in refusing to charge the jury as to the law of constructive notice. The evidence established that, had the underlying action gone to trial, the jury could have found that the conditions at the construction site were inherently dangerous, and the wooden beams, which ultimately caused the accident, had been utilized for a sufficient length of time for Horn to have become aware of the dangers ( see, Batton v. Elghanayan, 43 N.Y.2d 898; Burden v Cadillac Developers Massapequa Corp., 19 A.D.2d 716, affd 14 N.Y.2d 523). Since Horn should have reasonably foreseen that injury could result from the conditions it created, a finding of liability would have been justified in that underlying action ( see, Paul v. Kagan, 92 A.D.2d 988; Lacanfora v. Goldapel, 37 A.D.2d 721).
We have reviewed appellant's other contentions and have found them to be without merit. We therefore affirm the judgment, insofar as appealed from. Mollen, P.J., Mangano, Gibbons and Bracken, JJ., concur.