BOYD v. BETHLEHEM STEEL CORPORATION (1998)

 Supreme Court erred in denying the motion of third-party defendant and cross motion of defendant for summary judgment dismissing the common-law negligence and Labor Law § 200 causes of action.   The record establishes that defendant did not direct, control or supervise the work being performed by plaintiff when he was injured (see, Russin v. Picciano & Son, 54 N.Y.2d 311, 317, 445 N.Y.S.2d 127, 429 N.E.2d 805;  Adamczyk v. Hillview Estates Dev. Corp., 226 A.D.2d 1049, 1050, 641 N.Y.S.2d 925;  cf., Mazzu v. Benderson Dev. Co., 224 A.D.2d 1009, 1011-1012, 637 N.Y.S.2d 540).

 The court further erred in denying that portion of defendant's motion for summary judgment seeking contractual indemnification from third-party defendant, including the costs incurred by defendant in the defense of the action brought by plaintiff.   The contract between defendant and third-party defendant provided that “[third-party defendant] shall indemnify and save harmless * * * [defendant] * * * from and against any loss or liability for or on account of any injury * * * or damages received or sustained by [third-party defendant] or any of its subcontractors or any employee, agent or invitee of [third-party defendant]”.   In view of the broad language of the indemnification provision, defendant is entitled to the costs and counsel fees it reasonably incurred in defense of the action brought by plaintiff (see, Lavorato v. Bethlehem Steel Corp., 91 A.D.2d 1184, 1184-1185, 459 N.Y.S.2d 170;  DiPerna v. American Broadcasting Cos., 200 A.D.2d 267, 612 N.Y.S.2d 564).   We remit the matter to Supreme Court to determine that amount.

Order unanimously reversed on the law with costs, defendant's motion granted in part, cross motion and third-party defendant's motion granted and matter remitted to Supreme Court for further proceedings.

MEMORANDUM: