§Why CasetextPricing

Justin Nazario, Respondent,v.222 Broadway, LLC, et al., Respondents.---------------------------------222 Broadway, LLC, et al., Third-Party Respondents, v. Knight Electrical Services Corp., Third-Party Appellant. (And Other Third-Party Actions.)

Brief

68 Cited authorities

  1. Ross v. Curtis-Palmer

    81 N.Y.2d 494 (N.Y. 1993)   Cited 3,599 times
    Holding that plaintiff's "§ 241 claim must fail because of the inadequacy of his allegations regarding the regulations defendants purportedly breached"

  2. Blake v. Neighborhood Hous. Serv. of N.Y.C.

    1 N.Y.3d 280 (N.Y. 2003)   Cited 1,771 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "an accident alone does not establish a Labor Law § 240 violation"

  3. Rizzuto v. L.A. Wenger Contracting Co., Inc.

    91 N.Y.2d 343 (N.Y. 1998)   Cited 1,931 times
    Holding that the jury could reasonably find “that someone within the chain of the construction project was negligent in not exercising reasonable care ... to ... remediate the hazard”

  4. Runner v. New York Stock Exchange

    2009 N.Y. Slip Op. 9310 (N.Y. 2009)   Cited 1,012 times   21 Legal Analyses
    Explaining that § 240 “was designed to prevent those types of accidents in which the scaffold, hoist, stay, ladder or other protective device proved inadequate to shield the injured worker from harm directly flowing from the application of the force of gravity to an object or person”

  5. Rocovich v. Consol Edison Co.

    78 N.Y.2d 509 (N.Y. 1991)   Cited 1,704 times
    Holding that "[i]t is an accepted rule that all parts of a statute are intended to be given effect and that a statutory construction which renders one part meaningless should be avoided"

  6. McCarthy v. Turner Constr

    2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 5541 (N.Y. 2011)   Cited 592 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a party cannot obtain common law indemnification unless it proves that it was not negligent

  7. Wilinski v. 334 East 92nd Hous. Dev. Fund Corp.

    2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 7477 (N.Y. 2011)   Cited 540 times   10 Legal Analyses
    In Wilinski, the plaintiff was injured when demolition debris fell from a wall near the plaintiff's work site causing two ten-foot high unsecured metal pipes to topple onto him from a height of about four feet.

  8. Russin v. Picciano Son

    54 N.Y.2d 311 (N.Y. 1981)   Cited 1,424 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding "[a]n implicit precondition to this duty to provide a safe place to work is that the party charged with that responsibility have the authority to control the activity bringing about the injury to enable it to avoid or correct an unsafe condition"

  9. Gordon v. Eastern Ry. Supply

    82 N.Y.2d 555 (N.Y. 1993)   Cited 895 times
    Holding that defendants were liable under Labor Law § 240 for plaintiffs fall and injury occasioned by an allegedly defective sandblaster where such injuries were the foreseeable result of the failure to provide plaintiff with a safe scaffold or ladder while sandblasted a railway car from a ladder

  10. Zimmer v. Performing Arts

    65 N.Y.2d 513 (N.Y. 1985)   Cited 1,053 times
    Holding that owners/contractors are liable under Labor Law section 240 where they failed to provide any safety devices for workers at a building site, and the absence of such devices is the proximate cause of injury to a worker"

  11. Section 23-1.13 - Electrical hazards

    N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. tit. 12 § 23-1.13   Cited 91 times

    (a) Operations subject to the jurisdiction of the Public Service Commission. None of the provisions of this section shall apply to or in connection with operations conducted by employers, owners, contractors and their agents subject to the jurisdiction of the Public Service Commission. (b) General. (1) Precautions. All power lines and power facilities around or near construction, demolition and excavation sites shall be considered as energized until assurance has been given that they are otherwise

  12. Section 600.10 - Format and content of records, appendices and briefs

    N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. tit. 22 § 600.10   Cited 11 times

    (a) Form and size. (1) Generally; paper and page size. Records, appendices and briefs shall be reproduced by any method that produces a permanent, legible, black on white copy and shall be on a good grade of white, opaque, unglazed recycled paper that satisfies the requirements of subdivision (e) of this section. Paper shall measure vertically 11 inches on the bound edge and horizontally 81/2 inches. The clerk may refuse to accept for filing a paper which is not legible or otherwise does not comply

  13. Section 1926.417 - Lockout and tagging of circuits

    29 C.F.R. § 1926.417   Cited 1 times

    (a)Controls. Controls that are to be deactivated during the course of work on energized or deenergized equipment or circuits shall be tagged. (b)Equipment and circuits. Equipment or circuits that are deenergized shall be rendered inoperative and shall have tags attached at all points where such equipment or circuits can be energized. (c)Tags. Tags shall be placed to identify plainly the equipment or circuits being worked on. 29 C.F.R. §1926.417 44 FR 8577, Feb. 9, 1979; 44 FR 20940, Apr. 6, 1979