Source: https://nytortsweekly.com/december-12-2017-vol-84/
Timestamp: 2019-04-25 18:02:07+00:00

Document:
Defendants and plaintiff both denied summary judgment on Labor Law §240(1) where a question of fact existed as to whether the bricks which struck plaintiff accidently fell from the building being worked on or were deliberately dropped by demolition workers. If deliberately dropped by demolition workers, they would not be considered falling objects for Labor Law §240(1).
Industrial code §23-3.3[g] (demotion protection) only applied within a building and was not applicable in this case.
Contractor responsible for asbestos and lead abatement and demotion at construction site denied summary judgement on Labor Law §200 where photographs showing visible clouds of dust during demolition and its experts’ failures to opine that it did not release toxins and that the toxins were not capable of causing plaintiff’s respiratory illness defeated any prima facie showing of entitlement to summary judgment. Flynn v Turner Constr. Co.
Building owner denied summary judgment where plaintiff claimed that the elevator suddenly dropped 9 floors relying on the doctrine of res ipsa loquitor and submitted evidence that an elevator does not normally suddenly drop 9 floors absent negligence, that the elevator was in the exclusive control of the defendant, and that no negligence on plaintiff’s part contributed to the event. Defendant’s argument that the presence of another passenger who activated the emergency stop button and jumped to try and stop the free fall disproved exclusive control was rejected. Colon v New York City Hous. Auth.
NYCHA granted summary judgment on plaintiff’s testimony and meteorological records showing that it was snowing at the time of the accident barring recovery under the storm in progress doctrine. Plaintiff’s testimony that he fell on “dirty snow” which may have fallen after defendant’s snow removal efforts, and conclusory claim that the snow removal efforts were inadequate failed to raise a question of fact. Filius v New York City Hous. Auth.
Movie production company granted summary judgment on Labor Law §200 because plaintiff was its special employee entitling it to the exclusivity of the workers comp defense. Rodriguez v Columbia Pictures Indus., Inc.
Third-party defendants, Verizon and its paving contractor, granted summary judgement of third-party complaint where evidence showed that motorcycle was cut off and did not hit any defect in the road causing the accident. Wiley v ESI N.Y. Inc.
Third party claim for common law indemnity and contribution against plaintiff’s employer dismissed where medical records showed that plaintiff did not sustain a grave injury under Workers Comp Law §11. Claim for contractual indemnity for defendant’s negligence dismissed as unenforceable under GOL §5-322.1 which prohibits indemnification for a party’s own negligence. Clavin v CAP Equip. Leasing Corp.

References: §240
 §240
 §23
 §200
 §200
 §11
 §5