Sinkaus v. Regional Scaffolding

3 Citing cases

  1. Cuevas v. Baruti Constr. Corp.

    164 A.D.3d 447 (N.Y. App. Div. 2018)   Cited 3 times

    Three of plaintiff's coworkers similarly testified that in lifting the machine over the wall by hand and attempting to control its descent with the rope, the workers lost control of it and one of the wheels or other parts of the machine crushed plaintiff's thumb.In opposition, defendant submitted a translation of a Spanish-language affidavit by Jose Veras, one of plaintiff's coworkers, who presented what defendant argues is an alternative account of the accident in which the injury was not caused by a falling object or the application of the force of gravity on the object (seeMartinez v. 342 Prop. LLC, 128 A.D.3d 408, 8 N.Y.S.3d 309 [1st Dept. 2015] ; Sinkaus v. Regional Scaffolding & Hoisting Co., Inc., 71 A.D.3d 478, 898 N.Y.S.2d 107 [1st Dept. 2010] ). The English translation states that "[a]s [plaintiff and Veras] pushed the machine to the edge of the roof, it would not move. [Plaintiff] told me that one of the wheels was stuck.

  2. Szafranski v. City of New York

    2021 N.Y. Slip Op. 30818 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2021)

    In a similar case, the Appellate Division stated "the accident was not caused by the effects of gravity. To the contrary, the cart rolled over plaintiff's foot while his co-workers were pushing it back up the ramp, that is, while the cart was ascending" (see Sinkaus v Regional Scaffolding & Hoisting Co., Inc., 71 AD3d 478, 479 [1st Dept 2010]). Labor Law ยง 240 (1) provides in relevant part: "All contractors and owners and their agents . . . in the . . . demolition [or] altering . . . of a building or structure shall furnish or erect, or cause to be furnished or erected for the performance of such labor, scaffolding, hoists, stays, ladders, slings, hangers, blocks, pulleys, braces, irons, ropes, and other devices which shall be so constructed, placed and operated as to give proper protection to a person so employed."

  3. Ryan v. BMR-Landmark at Eastview LLC

    2020 N.Y. Slip Op. 30338 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2020)

    Even if the path was an earth ramp, plaintiff offers no evidence as to its grade. (Cf. Sinkaus v Regional Scaffolding & Hoisting Co., Inc., 71 AD3d 478 [1st Dept 2010] [even assuming subsection applicable, defendant submitted evidence that slope of ramp less than 25 percent]). (d). Earth ramps and runways used by persons.