DELOACH v. CITY OF NEW YORK (1999)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Maxine DELOACH, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. The CITY OF NEW YORK, Defendant-Appellant.

Decided: February 23, 1999

SULLIVAN, J.P., ELLERIN, WILLIAMS and WALLACH, JJ.

Howard A. Suckle, for Plaintiff-Respondent. Linda H. Young, for Defendant-Appellant.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Louis York, J.), entered December 29, 1997, which, in an action by a laborer under Labor Law §§ 240 and 241 to recover for personal injuries sustained at a construction site repairing the FDR Drive, insofar as appealed from, denied defendant City's cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The IAS court correctly held that although defendant City was not a party to the construction contract between plaintiff's employers and the State, it nevertheless should be deemed an “owner” of the site for purposes of the Labor Law, because it at all times shared concurrent responsibility with the State for the safety of this arterial highway and had the right to approve all of the plans, designs and specifications for its reconstruction (Highway Law § 349-c[3.1]-[3.4],[3.6]; see, Nowlin v. City of New York, 81 N.Y.2d 81, 86-87, 595 N.Y.S.2d 927, 612 N.E.2d 285; Gregorio v. City of New York, 246 A.D.2d 275, 677 N.Y.S.2d 119).

MEMORANDUM DECISION.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network