From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Holka v. Mt. Mercy Academy

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Nov 15, 1995
221 A.D.2d 949 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

November 15, 1995

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Erie County, Notaro, J.

Present — Green, J.P., Pine, Fallon, Callahan and Davis, JJ.


Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly granted the cross motion of plaintiffs for partial summary judgment on the issue of liability under Labor Law § 240 (1). Douglas A. Holka (plaintiff), an employee of third-party defendant, Building Controls Services, Inc. (BCS), was sent to Mt. Mercy Academy to remove a broken motor from a blower unit of the ventilation system, located on the roof of the building. He was injured when he fell while descending an interior permanently affixed ladder leading from the roof. We reject the contention of BCS and defendant, Mt. Mercy Academy (Mt. Mercy), that Labor Law § 240 (1) does not apply to a permanently affixed ladder (see, Szopinski v MJ Mech. Servs., 217 A.D.2d 906). We further reject their contention that plaintiff was not engaged in a protected activity within the meaning of Labor Law § 240 (1). We conclude that the removal of the broken motor from the blower unit for the purpose of repairing it constituted the repair of a structure within the meaning of the statute, rather than routine maintenance (see, Fuller v Niagara Mohawk Corp., 213 A.D.2d 986; cf., Smith v Shell Oil, 85 N.Y.2d 1000; Rennoldson v Volpe Realty Corp., 216 A.D.2d 912).

Finally, contrary to the contention of BCS and Mt. Mercy, they are liable under section 240 (1) because plaintiff fell from a ladder while working at an elevated work site; the fact that he fell establishes that the ladder failed to provide proper protection (see, Gordon v Eastern Ry. Supply, 82 N.Y.2d 555; Golda v Hutchinson Enters., 219 A.D.2d 803; Ellis v Hammond Irving, 217 A.D.2d 923).


Summaries of

Holka v. Mt. Mercy Academy

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Nov 15, 1995
221 A.D.2d 949 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

Holka v. Mt. Mercy Academy

Case Details

Full title:DOUGLAS A. HOLKA et al., Respondents, v. MT. MERCY ACADEMY, Appellant and…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Nov 15, 1995

Citations

221 A.D.2d 949 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
634 N.Y.S.2d 310

Citing Cases

Wilson v. City of New York

In considering whether replacing parts of a building's equipment is work covered by Section(s) 240(1), the…

White v. Motors Corp.

We agree with plaintiff that he was engaged in a protected activity within the meaning of Labor Law § 240…