Opinion
Decided June 24, 2004.
Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department, entered October 20, 2003. The Appellate Division, with two Justices dissenting, (1) dismissed an appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Lawrence Knipel, J.), which had granted, on consent, that branch of defendants' summary judgment motion dismissing plaintiff's Labor Law § 240 (1) and § 241 (6) causes of action insofar as asserted against defendant Irvine Realty Group, Inc., (2) affirmed, insofar as reviewed, so much of the order as granted that branch of defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing plaintiff's Labor Law § 240 (1) and § 241 (6) causes of action insofar as asserted against the Simons defendants, and denied plaintiffs' cross motion for summary judgment on liability on the Labor Law § 240 (1) cause of action, and (3) awarded defendants one bill of costs.
Stejskal v. Simons, 309 AD2d 853, affirmed.
Profeta Eisenstein, New York City ( Fred R. Profeta, Jr., of counsel), for appellants.
DeCicco, Gibbons McNamara, P.C., New York City ( Dennis A. Breen of counsel), for respondents.
Chief Judge KAYE and Judges G.B. SMITH, CIPARICK, ROSENBLATT, GRAFFEO, READ and R.S. SMITH concur.
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs. The evidence unequivocally demonstrated that the sole purpose of the construction work was to convert what was a multiple dwelling into a one-family dwelling for the owners' use. Thus, defendant owners were entitled to avail themselves of the one- or two-family homeowner's exemption provided in Labor Law § 240 (1) and § 241 ( see Khela v. Neiger, 85 NY2d 333, 338; Cannon v. Putnam, 76 NY2d 644, 650).
On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals ( 22 NYCRR 500.4), order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.