Source: https://nytortsweekly.com/august-22-2017-vol-68/
Timestamp: 2019-04-25 17:51:29+00:00

Document:
Plaintiff’s motion to compel nursing home to disclose incident reports relating to plaintiff’s decedent’s prior falls granted and nursing home’s motion for protective order denied where the affidavit of the nursing home administrator, privilege log, and in camera inspection of 3 reports showed that the documents were copied by and not generated by or at the behest of the nursing home’s quality assurance committee. Robertson v Brookdale Hosp. Med. Ctr.
Building owner and GC granted summary judgment on Labor Law §240(1) on ground that plaintiff, who chose to walk on an unsecured wooden plank that he had just laid rather than on secured planks which he had used minutes before, was the sole proximate cause of his injury. Labor Law §241(6) claims dismissed as defendants showed that the alleged violations of the industrial code were not a proximate cause of the plaintiff’s injuries or they did not apply to the facts of the case. GC granted summary judgment on Labor Law §200 and negligence claims because it did not have the ability to control the manner in which the work was performed. Melendez v 778 Park Ave. Bldg. Corp.
Worker who stacked 2 Baker scaffolds and an unopened A-frame ladder to perform sheet rock which caused scaffolds to fall met his initial burden for summary judgment on Labor Law §240(1) but defendant raised an issue of fact on sole proximate cause by showing that pipe scaffolds were available, provided adequate protection, and that plaintiff “based on his training, prior practice, and common sense, knew or should have known to use pipe scaffolds,” and that the work could have been performed without the unopened A-frame ladder. Plaintiff failed to meet his prima facie burden on Labor Law §241(6) predicated on industrial code §23-1.21(b)(4)(ii) (ladder footings). Nalvarte v Long Is. Univ.
Comment: This decision goes beyond the more typical situation where there is a direct instruction to use a specific safety device on the day of the accident to allow proof, at least in a summary judgment setting, based on knowledge, custom and practice, and common sense.
Plaintiff’s motion to set aside defense verdict because the court stenographer fell asleep during portions of the defendants’ summation, was unable to provide read backs, court reporter died after the trial, and the parties were unable to reconstruct and settle the transcript. Since the inability to create an accurate copy of the trial transcript impairs the right of appeal, the verdict must be set aside in civil cases . Monaco v New York City Tr. Auth.
Medical malpractice action dismissed where plaintiff failed to timely serve a Complaint in response to a demand pursuant to CPLR §3012(b), failed to give a reasonable excuse for the delay, or show a meritorious cause of action. Riley v Health & Hosp. Corp.
Carrier which disclaimed in underlying personal injury suit resulting in a judgment after inquest, failed to meet its initial burden for summary judgment in action by underlying plaintiff to collect judgment under Ins. L. §3420 where it submitted letters and memos from defense counsel and an investigator it hired in the underlying case attributing certain statements to the insured which were hearsay and carrier failed to show that they met any exception to the hearsay rule. DeLuca v RLI Ins. Co.
School district failed to meet its initial burden by submitting evidence establishing triable issues of fact as to whether it knew of the student’s dangerous propensities from prior altercations in the recent past and that the incident, where the studernt grabbed the infant-plaintiff’s hair and slammed his head into a table, occurred so quickly and spontaneously that it could not be prevented by any degree of supervision. Rt v Three Vil. Cent. Sch. Dist.
School district denied summary judgment based on its custodian’s testimony that he inspected the area 1.5 hours before the accident, that he saw no ice, and that it was sanded and salted where testimony of plaintiff and 2 eyewitnesses, included in the defendant’s motion papers, was that the area was icy and slippery and had no salt or sand, raising questions of fact. Ross v Half Hollow Hills Cent. Sch. Dist.
Action against truck driver who resided in New Jersey and truck company in Pennsylvania for accident occurring in Virginia dismissed for lack of personal jurisdiction where plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue regarding whether defendants conducted meaningful business in New York substantially related to the subject matter of the action. Plaintiff failed to show that further discovery would uncover evidence not available to respond to the motion. Santiago v Highway Frgt. Carriers, Inc.
Construction manager granted summary judgment where its contract detailed responsibility for coordinating work relating to the #7 subway extension project but did not confer authority to supervise and control the work being performed by the plaintiff. It was not an owner or an agent. Lamar v Hill Intl., Inc.
Landscaping company granted summary judgment where plaintiff testified that she tripped when her foot went underneath a floor mat that she assumed had been lifted immediately prior to her fall by a leaf blower operated by the landscaper. The plaintiff’s assumption was speculation. Razza v LP Petroleum Corp.
Adjoining landowner granted summary judgment where plaintiff tripped on sidewalk due to missing caulk between 2 sidewalk flags leaving a gap of approximately 1” since the defect was physically insignificant and the surrounding circumstances did not pose an increased risk. Melia v 50 Ct. St. Assoc.
Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment brought 2 months after defendant answered and prior to discovery denied as premature. Chander v Eagle Sanitation, Inc.

References: §240
 §241
 §200
 §240
 §241
 §23
 §3012
 §3420