From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Douglas v. Sherwood 48 Assocs.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Jun 14, 2018
162 A.D.3d 498 (N.Y. App. Div. 2018)

Opinion

6869 302851/08 84047/08

06-14-2018

Norma DOUGLAS, Plaintiff–Respondent, v. SHERWOOD 48 ASSOCIATES, etc., et al., Defendants–Appellants. [And a Third–Party Action]

Perry, Van Etten, Rozanski & Primavera, LLP, New York (Elizabeth Gelfand Kastner of counsel, Melville), for appellants. Pollack, Pollack, Isaac & DeCicco, LLP, New York (Brian J. Isaac of counsel, White Plains), for respondent.


Perry, Van Etten, Rozanski & Primavera, LLP, New York (Elizabeth Gelfand Kastner of counsel, Melville), for appellants.

Pollack, Pollack, Isaac & DeCicco, LLP, New York (Brian J. Isaac of counsel, White Plains), for respondent.

Acosta, P.J., Manzanet–Daniels, Tom, Mazzarelli, Moulton, JJ.

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Wilma Guzman, J.), entered on or about July 25, 2017, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, denied defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the Labor Law § 200 and common-law negligence claims and the Labor Law § 241(6) claim predicated upon Industrial Code ( 12 NYCRR) § 23–5.18(h), unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff was injured while pulling a mobile scaffold with both hands, when she stepped backward and her left heel fell into one of the estimated 12–inch deep trenches in the concrete flooring, and a wheel of the scaffold dropped onto her foot.

Summary dismissal of the Labor Law § 200 and common-law negligence claims is precluded by testimony and photographic evidence that raises triable issues of fact as to whether defendants were obligated to maintain the safety of the premises (see Fraser v. Pace Plumbing Corp., 93 A.D.3d 616, 941 N.Y.S.2d 114 [1st Dept. 2012] ), were negligent in doing so, and had actual or constructive knowledge of the uncovered trenches in the concrete flooring where several trades were working at the time of plaintiff's accident (see Ventura v. Ozone Park Holding Corp., 84 A.D.3d 516, 923 N.Y.S.2d 67 [1st Dept. 2011] ).

Dismissal of the Labor Law § 241(6) claim is precluded by factual issues as to whether the injury to plaintiff's left leg was proximately caused by defendants' violation of 12 NYCRR 23–5.18(h), which provides, inter alia, that "[manually-propelled] [s]caffolds shall be moved only on level floors or equivalent surfaces free from obstructions and openings."


Summaries of

Douglas v. Sherwood 48 Assocs.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Jun 14, 2018
162 A.D.3d 498 (N.Y. App. Div. 2018)
Case details for

Douglas v. Sherwood 48 Assocs.

Case Details

Full title:Norma Douglas, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Sherwood 48 Associates, etc., et…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Date published: Jun 14, 2018

Citations

162 A.D.3d 498 (N.Y. App. Div. 2018)
162 A.D.3d 498
2018 N.Y. Slip Op. 4426

Citing Cases

Wodz v. City of New York

In this case, as statutory agent of owner, Mega may be found liable for both an unsafe condition in the…