From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Paciente v. MBG Development, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 30, 2000
276 A.D.2d 761 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)

Opinion

Argued October 3, 2000

October 30, 2000.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal, as limited by their notice of appeal and brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Fredman, J.), entered August 31, 1999, as granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the causes of action based upon Labor Law §§ 200, 240(1), and 241(6).

Schreffler Associates, New York, N.Y. (Neil F. Schreffler and The Breakstone Law Firm, P.C. [Jay L. T. Breakstone] of counsel), for appellants.

Ahmuty, Demers McManus, Albertson, N.Y. (Frederick B. Simpson and Brendan T. Fitzpatrick of counsel), for respondent.

Before: THOMAS R. SULLIVAN, J.P., SONDRA MILLER, HOWARD MILLER, NANCY E. SMITH, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The plaintiff Angelo Paciente was allegedly injured when he slipped and fell down snow-and ice-covered stairs he was shoveling for his employer at a construction site owned by the defendant. The Supreme Court properly dismissed the Labor Law § 200 cause of action since the defendant established that it did not exercise control or supervision over Paciente's work (see, Ross v. Curtis-Palmer Hydro-Elec. Co., 81 N.Y.2d 494; DeGennaro v. Long Is. R.R., 258 A.D.2d 496). Dismissal of the Labor Law § 240(1) cause of action was also proper since routine maintenance activities in a nonconstruction, nonrenovation context are not protected by Labor Law § 240 (see, Brown v. Christopher St. Owners Corp., 87 N.Y.2d 938, 939; Vanerstrom v. Strasser, 240 A.D.2d 563). The record also supports the Supreme Court's conclusion that the work performed by Paciente was not construction work within the meaning of Labor Law § 241(6) (see, Constantino v. Kreisler Borg Florman Gen. Constr. Co., 272 A.D.2d 361; Luthi v. Long Is. Resource Corp., 251 A.D.2d 554; Vernieri v. Empire Realty Co., 219 A.D.2d 593).


Summaries of

Paciente v. MBG Development, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 30, 2000
276 A.D.2d 761 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
Case details for

Paciente v. MBG Development, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:ANGELO PACIENTE, ET AL., APPELLANTS, v. MBG DEVELOPMENT, INC., RESPONDENT…

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

Date published: Oct 30, 2000

Citations

276 A.D.2d 761 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
715 N.Y.S.2d 436

Citing Cases

Quintanilla v. United Talmudical Acad. Torah V'Yirah, Inc.

In support of that branch of their motion for summary judgment dismissing plaintiff's Labor Law § 240(1)…

Wirkus v. Cedry LLC

In opposition, plaintiff argues that "where, as here, a stairway is being used to facilitate a plaintiff's…