Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Rupert BLAKE, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING SERVICES OF NEW YORK CITY, INC., Defendant-Respondent.
Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Barry Salman, J.), entered on or about August 19, 2002, dismissing the complaint upon a jury verdict in defendant's favor and bringing up for review an order, same court and Justice, entered March 20, 2002, denying plaintiffs' motion to set aside the jury verdict, unanimously affirmed, without costs. Appeal from the order entered March 20, 2002, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as subsumed in the appeal from the ensuing judgment.
The trial evidence in this action to recover for construction site injuries pursuant to Labor Law § 240(1), demonstrated that plaintiff, the owner of the subcontracting company retained to perform work on residential premises by defendant contractor, was working on his own when the extending ladder he owned and which he selected and erected for the contracted-for work suddenly retracted causing him to fall. Plaintiff testified that he did not know what caused the ladder to retract, and that the ladder had previously been steady and free from defect. Under these circumstances, a factual issue was posed as to whether plaintiff's injury was caused by some inadequacy of the ladder or was solely attributable to the manner in which plaintiff used the ladder (see Weininger v. Hagedorn & Co., 91 N.Y.2d 958, 960, 672 N.Y.S.2d 840, 695 N.E.2d 709; Weber v. 1111 Park Ave. Realty Corp., 253 A.D.2d 376, 676 N.Y.S.2d 174). The jury was entitled to resolve this issue as it did and we perceive no ground upon which its verdict would be susceptible to disturbance (see Niewieroski v. Natl. Cleaning Contrs., 126 A.D.2d 424, 510 N.Y.S.2d 127, lv. denied 70 N.Y.2d 602, 518 N.Y.S.2d 1024, 512 N.E.2d 550).
Plaintiff's remaining arguments are unavailing.
Thank you for your feedback!
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.
Decided: January 07, 2003
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)