Case Name: Yun Kai Li, Appellant, v. Pho Viet Huong Restaurant et al., Respondents, et al., Defendant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2002-02-14
Citations: 291 A.D.2d 280
Docket Number: 
Parties: Yun Kai Li, Appellant, v Pho Viet Huong Restaurant et al., Respondents, et al., Defendant.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 291
Pages: 280–281

Head Matter:
Yun Kai Li, Appellant, v Pho Viet Huong Restaurant et al., Respondents, et al., Defendant.
[737 NYS2d 288]

Opinion:
—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Paula Omansky, J.), entered October 5, 2000, which, inter alia, granted defendants-respondents' motion for summary judgment dismissing plaintiffs claims pursuant to Labor Law § 240 (1) and § 241 (6), unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Given the undisputed evidence that the illuminated sign plaintiff had been assigned to repair only needed two light bulbs replaced, the motion court properly found that plaintiff was not engaged in an activity protected under Labor Law § 240 (1) when he fell from the ladder he had climbed to inspect the sign (see, Smith v Shell Oil Co., 85 NY2d 1000). Similarly, since plaintiff, at the time of his injury, was not employed at or frequenting a construction, excavation or demolition site, his Labor Law § 241 (6) claim was not viable. We have considered plaintiffs remaining arguments and find them unavailing. Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Rosenberger, Rubin, Friedman and Marlow, JJ.