Summary
In Vohra, the court found that a scaffolding company was a statutory agent where it was hired to (and did) supervise and control scaffold dismantling, which was the injury producing work (Vohra, 180 A.D.3d at 503).
Summary of this case from Evelyn v. 560 Assocs. Del.Opinion
11026 Index 301572/13
02-13-2020
Vishal VOHRA, et al., Plaintiffs–Respondents, v. The MOUNT SINAI HOSPITAL, et al., Defendants–Respondents, Rhino Construction NYC, Inc., Defendant, Rock Scaffolding Corp., Defendant–Appellant.
Carol R. Finocchio, New York, for appellant. Ahmuty, Demers & McManus, Albertson (Glenn A. Kaminska of counsel), for The Mount Sinai Hospital and The Mount Sinai Medical Center, Inc., respondents. Law Offices of Neil Kalra, PC, Forest Hills (Neil Kalra of counsel), for Vishal Vohra and Neetu S. Vohra, respondents.
Carol R. Finocchio, New York, for appellant.
Ahmuty, Demers & McManus, Albertson (Glenn A. Kaminska of counsel), for The Mount Sinai Hospital and The Mount Sinai Medical Center, Inc., respondents.
Law Offices of Neil Kalra, PC, Forest Hills (Neil Kalra of counsel), for Vishal Vohra and Neetu S. Vohra, respondents.
Richter, J.P., Manzanet–Daniels, Gesmer, Singh, JJ.
Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Julia I. Rodriguez, J.), entered on or about May 14, 2019, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted plaintiffs' motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of liability on their Labor Law § 240(1) claim as against defendant Rock Scaffolding Corp. (Rock), granted the motion of defendants The Mount Sinai Hospital and The Mount Sinai Medical Center, Inc. (collectively Mount Sinai) for summary judgment on their common-law indemnification claim against Rock, and denied Rock's motion for summary judgment dismissing the claims and cross claims as against it, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The court properly granted partial summary judgment in favor of plaintiffs and against Rock on the Labor Law § 240(1) claim where plaintiff Vishal Vohra was injured while dismantling a scaffold. The record shows that Rock was a statutory agent of the general contractor, which had hired it for the installation and dismantling of scaffolding at the project (see Russin v. Louis N. Picciano & Son , 54 N.Y.2d 311, 318, 445 N.Y.S.2d 127, 429 N.E.2d 805 [1981] ). There was also ample evidence that Rock exercised supervision and control over the injury-producing work, thereby entitling Mount Sinai to common-law indemnification from Rock (see Naughton v. City of New York , 94 A.D.3d 1, 10, 940 N.Y.S.2d 21 [1st Dept. 2012] ).
The court properly denied Rock's motion seeking dismissal of the Labor Law § 200 and common-law negligence claims as against it. Triable issues remain as to whether Rock had notice of a dangerous or defective condition on the work site and also whether the injury was caused by the manner in which the work was being performed (see Cappabianca v. Skanska USA Bldg. Inc. , 9 A.D.3d 139, 144, 950 N.Y.S.2d 35 [1st Dept. 2012] ).