16 Cited authorities

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
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"
Klein v. City of New York
89 N.Y.2d 833 (N.Y. 1996) Cited 613 times
In Klein, the plaintiff sustained injuries when he fell from a ladder that slipped out from underneath him because the floor had recently been flooded with a slick and greasy water, and a “film” or “ ‘gunk’ ” residue remained (id. at 834, 652 N.Y.S.2d 723, 675 N.E.2d 458).
Joblon v. Solow
91 N.Y.2d 457 (N.Y. 1998) Cited 383 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that "routine maintenance" and "decorative modifications," such as the removal and replacement of a burnt-out lightbulb on an illuminated sign or "the minimal cleaning of windows," fall outside the reach of Section 240
Felker v. Corning Inc.
90 N.Y.2d 219 (N.Y. 1997) Cited 374 times
Argued May 8, 1997; Decided June 12, 1997 Appeal from the Supreme Court, Steuben County (Henry J. Scudder, J.) Burke, Albright, Harter Rzepka, L. L. P., Rochester ( Johnson S. Albright II and Matthew D. Nafus of counsel), for third-party defendant-appellant. Martin Iati, Rochester ( Valerie L. Barbic of counsel), for Corning Incorporated and another, respondents. Krenzer Galliher, P.C., Honeoye Falls ( Cyril A. Krenzer of counsel), for Raymond L. Felker, Jr., and another, respondents. SMITH, J. Plaintiff
Prats v. Port Auth. of N.Y. N.J
100 N.Y.2d 878 (N.Y. 2003) Cited 288 times
Finding that injury sustained during an inspection taking place during project to renovate air-conditioning systems constituted alteration
Panek v. County of Albany
99 N.Y.2d 452 (N.Y. 2003) Cited 275 times
Holding that the plaintiff was engaged in a significant physical change to the building within the meaning of New York Labor Law § 240 where "[t]he removal of the two 200–pound air handlers [from the cooling system] required two days of preparatory labor, including the dismantling of electrical and plumbing components of the cooling system, and involved the use of a mechanical lift to support the weight of the air handlers."
Abbatiello v. Lancaster Assoc
3 N.Y.3d 46 (N.Y. 2004) Cited 187 times
Noting that law "imposes absolute liability on owners and contractors for any breach of statutory duty that proximately causes injury"
Saint v. Syracuse Supply Co.
2015 N.Y. Slip Op. 2802 (N.Y. 2015) Cited 124 times 1 Legal Analyses
Finding that Labor Law § 240 was applicable where plaintiff was caused to fall from a catwalk when a strong gust of wind caused loose vinyl material to strike him because the statute "imposes on owners or general contractors and their agents a nondelegable duty, and absolute liability for injuries proximately caused by the failure to provide appropriate safety devices to workers who are subject to elevation-related risks"
Nimirovski v. Vornado Realty Trust Co.
29 A.D.3d 762 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006) Cited 104 times
In Nimirovski, the plaintiff fell from the scaffold when part of the storefront on which the plaintiff was performing work, fell and struck the base of the scaffolding causing it to shake.

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.)

16 Cited authorities

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

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"

In Klein, the plaintiff sustained injuries when he fell from a ladder that slipped out from underneath him because the floor had recently been flooded with a slick and greasy water, and a “film” or “ ‘gunk’ ” residue remained (id. at 834, 652 N.Y.S.2d 723, 675 N.E.2d 458).

Holding that "routine maintenance" and "decorative modifications," such as the removal and replacement of a burnt-out lightbulb on an illuminated sign or "the minimal cleaning of windows," fall outside the reach of Section 240

Finding that injury sustained during an inspection taking place during project to renovate air-conditioning systems constituted alteration

Noting that law "imposes absolute liability on owners and contractors for any breach of statutory duty that proximately causes injury"

In Nimirovski, the plaintiff fell from the scaffold when part of the storefront on which the plaintiff was performing work, fell and struck the base of the scaffolding causing it to shake.