From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Pryer v. Leon D. Dematteis Construction Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Sep 21, 1998
253 A.D.2d 804 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

September 21, 1998

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Alpert, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with one bill of costs.

The plaintiff Timothy Pryer, a corrections officer at the Nassau County Corrections Facility, allegedly was injured while descending stairs in an observation tower. At his examination before trial, Pryer stated that he slipped on sand and that he had noticed sand on the stairs during that shift and other shifts he had worked in that tower. He alleged that the sand resulted from ongoing construction at the Nassau County Corrections Facility. The defendant third-party plaintiff, Leon D. DeMatteis Construction Corp., the main contractor on the tower, was at that time also constructing a new building located approximately 50 to 75 feet from the tower, and had subcontracted the excavation work for the foundation of that building to the defendant SL Concrete Construction Corp. (hereinafter SL). SL, in turn, had subcontracted the excavation work for the laying of the foundation to another subcontractor.

The Supreme Court granted the respondents' respective motions for summary judgment dismissing the plaintiffs' causes of action under the Labor Law and all counterclaims insofar as asserted against them by the appellant since those counterclaims were base upon the plaintiffs' causes of action.

Pryer was not engaged in any of the activities enumerated in Labor Law § 240 Lab. and he was not employed as a construction worker. In addition, Pryer was not injured at a construction area within the meaning of Labor Law § 241 Lab. (6). Accordingly,

Pryer had no claim against the respondents under Labor Law §§ 240 Lab. or 241 Lab. (6). and the appellant's counterclaims, which were based on in alleged breach of the duty owed by the respondents to Pryer under these sections of the Labor Law, were also properly dismissed ( see, Ross v. Curts-Palmer HydroElec. Co., 81 N.Y.2d 494; Mordkofsky v. V.C.V. Dev. Corp., 76 N.Y.2d 573).

The appellant's remaining contention is without merit.

Mangano, P.J., Corpentino, Joy and Florio, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Pryer v. Leon D. Dematteis Construction Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Sep 21, 1998
253 A.D.2d 804 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

Pryer v. Leon D. Dematteis Construction Corp.

Case Details

Full title:TIMOTHY PRYER et al., Plaintiffs, v. LEON D. DEMATTEIS CONSTRUCTION CORP.…

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

Date published: Sep 21, 1998

Citations

253 A.D.2d 804 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
677 N.Y.S.2d 603

Citing Cases

County of Nassau v. Michigan Mutual Ins. Co.

There is no merit to the plaintiff's contention that Michigan Mutual Insurance Corporation (hereinafter…

Bolster v. E. Bldg. & Restoration, Inc.

a case-by-case basis, depending on the context of the work” ( id. at 883, 768 N.Y.S.2d 178, 800 N.E.2d…