Sierzputowski v. City of New York

1 Citing case

  1. Sierra v. Roc-Fifth Ave. Assocs.

    2022 N.Y. Slip Op. 34020 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2022)

    Here, plaintiff has failed to eliminate a triable issue of fact as to whether the specific hazard (i.e., the partial fall and the resulting swinging out of the light fixture which, in turn, struck plaintiff in the back) arose from the structural instability caused by the progress of the demolition, rather than from Eric's (i.e., plaintiff's coworker) actual performance of the demolition work itself (see Flores v Crescent Beach Club, LLC, 208 A.D.3d 560, 562 [2d Dept 2022]; Gomez v 670 Merrick Rd. Realty Corp., 189 A.D.3d 1187, 1191 [2d Dept 2020]; Vega v Renaissance 632 Broadway, LLC, 103 A.D.3d 883, 885 [2d Dept 2013]; Campoverde v Bruckner Plaza Assoc., L.P., 50 A.D.3d 836, 837 [2d Dept 2008]; cf. Mendez v Vardaris Tech, Inc., 173 A.D.3d 1004, 1005-1006 [2d Dept 2019]; Sierzputowski v City of New York, 14 A.D.3d 606, 607 [2d Dept 2005]; Salinas v Barney Skanska Const. Co., 2 A.D.3d 619, 622-623 [2d Dept 2003]).