Opinion
October 1, 1993
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Steuben County, Purple, Jr., J.
Present — Callahan, J.P., Balio, Lawton, Boomer and Boehm, JJ.
Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly granted defendant's motion for summary judgment because plaintiff was not a person "employed" to carry out work within the purview of Labor Law § 240 (1) and § 241 (6) (see, Gibson v. Worthington Div. of McGraw-Edison Co., 78 N.Y.2d 1108; Chabot v. Baer, 55 N.Y.2d 844, affg 82 A.D.2d 928; Groger v. Morrison-Knudsen Co., 184 A.D.2d 620; Malczewski v. Cannon Design, 125 A.D.2d 941). The record establishes that plaintiff's employer was hired to perform inspection work on the bridge on behalf of the State of New York and was not hired to perform any construction or repair work on the bridge.
Supreme Court also properly dismissed plaintiff's cause of action for common-law negligence. The record demonstrates that defendant City neither exercised supervision or control over the work, nor had actual or constructive knowledge of a dangerous condition on the site (see, Mosher v. St. Joseph's Villa, 184 A.D.2d 1000, 1001; DaBolt v. Bethlehem Steel Corp., 92 A.D.2d 70, 72-73, lv dismissed 60 N.Y.2d 554).