From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Medrano v. Port Auth. of N.Y. & N.J.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Oct 17, 2017
154 A.D.3d 521 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)

Opinion

4687, 153442/14.

10-17-2017

Felix MEDRANO, et al., Plaintiffs–Respondents, v. PORT AUTHORITY OF NEW YORK and New Jersey, et al., Defendants–Appellants.

Segal McCambridge Singer & Mahoney, Ltd., New York (Mary E. Adams of counsel), for appellants. Pollack, Pollack, Isaac & DeCicco, LLP, New York (Brian J. Isaac of counsel), for respondents.


Segal McCambridge Singer & Mahoney, Ltd., New York (Mary E. Adams of counsel), for appellants.

Pollack, Pollack, Isaac & DeCicco, LLP, New York (Brian J. Isaac of counsel), for respondents.

TOM, J.P., RICHTER, ANDRIAS, GESMER, SINGH, JJ.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (David B. Cohen, J.), entered July 25, 2016, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted plaintiffs' motion for partial summary judgment on the Labor Law § 240(1) claim as against defendant Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (Port Authority), unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion denied.

Although plaintiffs established their prima facie entitlement to partial summary judgment on their Labor Law § 240(1) claim (see Faver v. Midtown Trackage Ventures, LLC, 150 A.D.3d 580, 52 N.Y.S.3d 626 [1st Dept.2017] ), Port Authority's evidence was sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact. The injured plaintiff testified that while he was applying fireproofing material to a ceiling beam by hand he fell from an unsecured defective ladder that was supplied to him by his assistant foreman, to whom he had complained about the ladder. However, his assistant foreman averred that he had not supplied the ladder, and that plaintiff had not complained to him about it, and his coworker averred that plaintiff had worked from the ground all day. Thus, his affidavit contradicted the injured plaintiff's account of the accident, and called into question his credibility (see Smigielski v. Teachers Ins. & Annuity Assn. of Am., 137 A.D.3d 676, 676, 29 N.Y.S.3d 272 [1st Dept.2016] ; Macchia v. Nastasi White, Inc., 26 A.D.3d 225, 809 N.Y.S.2d 47 [1st Dept. 2006] ).


Summaries of

Medrano v. Port Auth. of N.Y. & N.J.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Oct 17, 2017
154 A.D.3d 521 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)
Case details for

Medrano v. Port Auth. of N.Y. & N.J.

Case Details

Full title:Felix MEDRANO, et al., Plaintiffs–Respondents, v. PORT AUTHORITY OF NEW…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Date published: Oct 17, 2017

Citations

154 A.D.3d 521 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)
62 N.Y.S.3d 338
2017 N.Y. Slip Op. 7216

Citing Cases

Mile v. Marangos Constr. Corp.

In any event, the conflicting admissible evidence regarding the status of the worksite raises factual and…

Villegas v. Rheem Textile Sys., Inc.

"On a motion for summary judgment the court is not to determine credibility, but whether there exists a…