Opinion
November 28, 1994
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Duchess County (Beisner, J.).
Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with one bill of costs payable to the respondents International Business Machines Corporation and Halmar Construction Corp.
The plaintiffs' cause of action alleging violations of Labor Law § 241 (6), which imposes a nondelegable duty upon owners and contractors to provide reasonable and adequate protection and safety to construction workers, was properly dismissed. Violations of general safety standards set in the regulations promulgated by the Commissioner of Labor will not suffice to sustain a cause of action under this section (see, Ross v Curtis-Palmer Hydro-Elec. Co., 81 N.Y.2d 494, 503-505; Narrow v Crane-Hogan Structural Sys., 202 A.D.2d 841). The regulation alleged to have been violated herein, 12 NYCRR 23-1.2 (e), relates to general safety standards, and the alleged violation of that provision did not give rise to a cause of action under Labor Law § 241 (6) (see, Narrow v. Crane-Hogan Structural Sys., 202 A.D.2d 841, supra; see also, Comes v. New York State Elec. Gas Corp., 189 A.D.2d 945, affd 82 N.Y.2d 876, 878).
Furthermore, the plaintiffs' cause of action alleging violations of Labor Law § 200, which codifies the owners' and contractors' common-law duty to provide employees with a safe workplace, was also properly dismissed. Where the alleged defect or dangerous condition arises from a subcontractor's methods and the owner or contractor exercises no supervisory control over the operation, no liability attaches under the common law or Labor Law § 200 (see, Lombardi v. Stout, 80 N.Y.2d 290, 295; see also, Comes v. New York State Elec. Gas Corp., supra, at 877).
We have examined the plaintiffs' remaining contentions and find that they are without merit. Sullivan, J.P., Balletta, Joy and Altman, JJ., concur.