SCAFFOLDING LACKED GUARDRAILS OR OTHER PROTECTIVE DEVICES
Under state law -- Labor Law 240(1) -- general contractors, owners, and their agents (whether or not they supervise or control the work) are strictly liable for accidents or injuries which occur during the course of construction activities. Specifically, individuals who work at significant heights and are at risk of falling are required, among other things, to be protected by scaffolding, ladders or other supports. [And the duty to protect those workers is nondelegable.]After JMM filed his case with the Bronx County Supreme Court, a judge denied his motion for summary judgment [this is, pre-trial relief] on his claim that the Labor Law had been violated.
When an appeal ensued, the Appellate Division, First Department, noted that JMM had sufficiently established, (nor was it rebutted), that the scaffolding on which he was working “lacked guardrails and that no other protective devices were provided to protect him from falling.”
Believing that no additional discovery had been warranted, and that the underlying determination was in error, the AD1 reversed the Supreme Court’s order, and granted summary judgment in JMM’s favor.
Think they labored over that?
# # #
DECISION