Summary
In Ares v State of New York (176 A.D.2d 203) the Second Department, citing to Matter of Dillon v State of New York (supra), recently held that "Labor Law § 241 applies only to work attendant upon the construction or demolition of buildings, and a highway cannot be considered a building within the meaning of the statute" (see, Vincent v Dresser Indus., 172 A.D.2d 1033).
Summary of this case from Mosher v. StateOpinion
September 24, 1991
Appeal from the Court of Claims (Gerard Weisberg, J.).
The court erred in concluding that Labor Law § 241 (6) is applicable to a highway repaving that had no connection to any building. Labor Law § 241 applies only to work attendant upon the construction or demolition of buildings, and a highway cannot be considered a building within the meaning of the statute (Matter of Dillon v. State of New York, 167 A.D.2d 574). Therefore, plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case against the Thruway Authority.
The conclusion of the Court of Claims was not against the weight of credible evidence nor contrary to the law (Dizak v State of New York, 124 A.D.2d 329). The fact-finder is responsible for evaluating the credibility of expert testimony, even if it is uncontradicted (Mechanick v. Conradi, 139 A.D.2d 857).
Concur — Carro, J.P., Milonas, Ellerin, Ross and Asch, JJ.