From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mitchell v. Howe

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Mar 21, 2003
303 A.D.2d 1001 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

CA 02-02370

March 21, 2003.

Appeal from an order of Supreme Court, Erie County (Notaro, J.), entered August 13, 2002, which denied the motion of defendant Kirst Construction, Inc. for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and cross claims against it.

KAMYSZ, O'NEILL, CANTWELL FEELEY, BUFFALO (EARL K. CANTWELL, II, OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

CELLINO BARNES, P.C., BUFFALO (JASON H. STERNE OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS.

PRESENT: PINE, J.P., WISNER, SCUDDER, KEHOE, AND BURNS, JJ.


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum:

Supreme Court properly denied the motion of Kirst Construction, Inc. (defendant) for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and cross claims against it. Labor Law § 241(6) "imposes liability upon a general contractor for the negligence of a subcontractor, even in the absence of control or supervision of the worksite" (Rizzuto v. Wenger Contr. Co., 91 N.Y.2d 343, 348-349 [emphasis omitted]; see Kane v. Coundorous, 293 A.D.2d 309, 310-311), and here there is an issue of fact whether defendant was acting as a general contractor to render it subject to liability under section 241(6).


Summaries of

Mitchell v. Howe

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Mar 21, 2003
303 A.D.2d 1001 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

Mitchell v. Howe

Case Details

Full title:ALLEN M. MITCHELL, JR., AND SONIA C. MITCHELL, PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS, v…

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

Date published: Mar 21, 2003

Citations

303 A.D.2d 1001 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
756 N.Y.S.2d 802