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.
Burhan ZAYED, Plaintiff, v. NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION, et al., Defendants.
Schiavone Construction Co., LLC, Third–Party Plaintiff–Respondent, v. Iron Bridge Constructors, Inc., Third–Party Defendant–Appellant.
Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Mary Ann Brigantti, J.), entered February 9, 2022, which denied Iron Bridge Constructors, Inc.’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the third-party complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Iron Bridge failed to sustain its prima facie burden of demonstrating entitlement to judgment as a matter of law. Plaintiff testified that he was hit by a gate that was improperly secured and blowing in the wind as he was leaving the trailer occupied by Iron Bridge on the work site where he was employed by a subcontractor. While the identity of the person who unlocked the gate and failed to secure it properly on the date of the accident was unknown, there was testimony from third-party plaintiff Schiavone Construction Co., LLC's project manager and safety site manager and Iron Bridge's project manager indicating that an Iron Bridge foreman that met with plaintiff that day had keys to the gate and sometimes opened it in the morning. Contrary to Iron Bridge's assertion, it was Iron Bridge's burden to show that the accident did not arise out of its work in order to obtain summary judgment on its contractual indemnification claim (see Winegrad v. New York Univ. Med. Ctr., 64 N.Y.2d 851, 853, 487 N.Y.S.2d 316, 476 N.E.2d 642 [1985]), which it failed to do.
Iron Bridge also failed to demonstrate that there was no issue of fact concerning its negligence and that Schiavone was guilty of some negligence that contributed to the cause of the accident in order to obtain summary judgment dismissing Schiavone's common-law indemnification claim (see Lexington Ins. Co. v. Kiska Dev. Group LLC, 182 A.D.3d 462, 464, 122 N.Y.S.3d 590 [1st Dept. 2020]). Moreover, since there remain questions of fact concerning Iron Bridge's negligence, dismissal of Schiavone's contribution claim and cause of action for failure to procure insurance were also unwarranted.
We have considered Iron Bridge's remaining arguments and find them 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.
Docket No: 614
Decided: September 26, 2023
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)