BECKFORD v. CITY OF NEW YORK (1999)

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Howard Silver, J.), entered on or about March 27, 1998, which granted plaintiff's motion for summary judgment as to liability upon his Labor Law § 240(1) claim, denied defendant Brenda Hecht Associates' cross motion for summary judgment upon its claim for indemnification against third-party defendant F.G.R., Inc., and granted the cross motion of defendant Partners for Housing for summary judgment upon its claim for indemnification against Brenda Hecht Associates, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

 Labor Law § 240(1), which is to be liberally construed (see, Lombardi v. Stout, 80 N.Y.2d 290, 296, 590 N.Y.S.2d 55, 604 N.E.2d 117), imposes absolute liability on owners, contractors and their agents for failing to furnish or erect necessary safety devices to protect workers from injuries proximately cause by such failure (see, Bland v. Manocherian, 66 N.Y.2d 452, 459, 497 N.Y.S.2d 880, 488 N.E.2d 810).   The motion court, finding that the documentary evidence indicated that no safety devices had been provided to workers by Brenda Hecht Associates, the general contractor and supervisor of the project, and that such failure was the proximate cause of plaintiff's injuries, properly granted plaintiff's motion for summary judgment as to liability upon his Labor Law § 240(1) claim.   Brenda Hecht Associates' contention that plaintiff's errors caused his injuries is at best a claim of comparative negligence, which is not a viable defense to a Labor Law § 240(1) claim (see, Stolt v. Gen. Foods Corp., 81 N.Y.2d 918, 920, 597 N.Y.S.2d 650, 613 N.E.2d 556).

 Because the contract between Brenda Hecht Associates and subcontractor F.G.R. Inc., plaintiff's employer, was not executed until two days after the accident, the court also properly denied Brenda Hecht Associates summary judgment on its claim for contractual indemnification against F.G.R. The court also properly found questions of fact as to the degree of supervision and control between Brenda Hecht Associates and F.G.R.

 Finally, since there was no competent proof that defendant Partners for Housing exercised any control over work performed at the project, the court properly granted its motion for summary judgment upon its claim for indemnification from Brenda Hecht Associates.

MEMORANDUM DECISION.