Summary
ruling special protections of § 240 not implicated where plaintiff was injured when he dropped a 120 pound beam seven inches
Summary of this case from Larosa v. Internap Network Servs. Corp.Opinion
Decided September 13, 1994
Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department, Cosmo J. Di Tucci, J.
Gilroy Downes Horowitz Goldstein, New York City (Lawrence C. Downes of counsel), for third-party defendant-appellant.
Birzon, Sobel Szczepanowski, Smithtown (Mitchell J. Birzon of counsel), for respondent.
MEMORANDUM.
The judgment appealed from and the order of the Appellate Division brought up for review should be reversed, with costs, and plaintiff's cause of action based on Labor Law § 240 dismissed.
Plaintiff in this case was exposed to the usual and ordinary dangers of a construction site, and not the extraordinary elevation risks envisioned by Labor Law § 240 (1). In placing a 120-pound beam onto the ground from seven inches above his head with the assistance of three other co-workers, Rodriguez was not faced with the special elevation risks contemplated by the statute (see, Ross v Curtis-Palmer Hydro-Elec. Co., 81 N.Y.2d 494, 501; Rocovich v Consolidated Edison Co., 78 N.Y.2d 509, 514).
Chief Judge KAYE and Judges SIMONS, TITONE, BELLACOSA, SMITH, LEVINE and CIPARICK concur in memorandum.
On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 N.Y.CRR 500.4), judgment appealed from and order of the Appellate Division brought up for review reversed, etc.