Opinion
Decided August 29, 2006.
APPEAL from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department, entered March 17, 2006. The Appellate Division, with two Justices dissenting, affirmed an order of the Supreme Court, Monroe County (Robert J. Lunn, J.), which had granted defendants' motions for summary judgment dismissing the amended complaint.
Schroeder v. Kalenak Painting Paperhanging, Inc., 27 AD3d 1097, affirmed.
The Barnes Firm, P.C., Rochester (Sareer A. Fazili of counsel), for appellant.
Burke, Albright, Harter Reddy, LLP, Rochester {Robert J. Burke of counsel), for Kalenak Painting Paperhanging, Inc., respondent.
Sugarman Law Firm, LLP, Syracuse (Sandra L. Holihan of counsel), for Morris Massry, respondent.
Before: Chief Judge KAYE and Judges G.B. Smith, Ciparick, ROSEN-BLATT, Graffeo, Read and R.S. Smith concur.
OPINION OF THE COURT
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.
Plaintiff concedes that wallpapering is not an enumerated activity under the Labor Law (see Labor Law § 240). Moreover, plaintiff fails to allege sufficient facts to establish that her work was part of a larger renovation project subject to coverage under the statute (see Martinez v. City of New York, 93 NY2d 322, 326; cf. Prats v. Port Auth. of NY. N.J., 100 NY2d 878). Plaintiffs section 241 (6) argument is similarly without merit.
On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals ( 22 NYCRR 500.11), order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.