Opinion
10804 Index 150040/18
01-16-2020
Miguel ROSARIO, Plaintiff–Respondent, v. PORT AUTHORITY OF NEW YORK & NEW JERSEY, Defendant–Appellant, One World Trade Center LLC, et al., Defendants.
London Fischer LLP, New York (Brian A. Kalman of counsel), for appellant. Gorayeb & Associates, P.C., New York (Martin J. Moskowitz of counsel), for respondent.
London Fischer LLP, New York (Brian A. Kalman of counsel), for appellant.
Gorayeb & Associates, P.C., New York (Martin J. Moskowitz of counsel), for respondent.
Friedman, J.P., Richter, Kern, Singh, JJ.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Kathryn E. Freed, J.), entered December 12, 2018, which, inter alia, denied the motion of defendant Port Authority of New York & New Jersey to dismiss the Labor Law §§ 240(1) and 241(6) claims as against it, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The court properly rejected the Port Authority's arguments that as a bistate entity created by a federally approved compact (see Matter of Agesen v. Catherwood , 26 N.Y.2d 521, 524, 311 N.Y.S.2d 886, 260 N.E.2d 525 [1970] ), it cannot be held liable under Labor Law §§ 240(1) or 241(6) for injuries plaintiff allegedly sustained while working in a building owned by the Port Authority (see Wortham v. Port Auth. of N.Y. & N.J. , 177 A.D.3d 481, 110 N.Y.S.3d 539 [1st Dept. 2019] ; see generally Agesen , 26 N.Y.2d at 525, 311 N.Y.S.2d 886, 260 N.E.2d 525 ). The Compact Clause of the United States Constitution is not implicated by the application of such New York workplace safety statutes to the Port Authority work site located in New York, which does not encroach on federal supremacy (see Cuyler v. Adams , 449 U.S. 433, 440, 101 S.Ct. 703, 66 L.Ed.2d 641 [1981] ).