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.
Owen GRAYSON, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants-Respondents, v. The CITY OF NEW YORK, et al., Defendants-Respondents, Falco Construction Corp., Defendant,
J.P. McGuire & Co., Inc., Defendant-Respondent-Appellant. MORRISON-KNUDSEN CO., INC., Third-Party Plaintiff-Appellant, v. A. SUNA & CO., INC., Third-Party Defendant-Respondent.
Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Douglas McKeon, J.), entered July 16, 1996, which denied plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment on the issue of Labor Law § 240(1) liability and denied cross motions for summary judgment by third-party plaintiff construction manager and defendant-respondent-appellant prime contractor on their causes of action for indemnification against third-party defendant subcontractor, plaintiff's employer, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, to grant plaintiff's motion and the construction manager's and prime contractor's cross motions.
Plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment on the Labor Law § 240(1) claim should have been granted on the basis of Owen Grayson's uncontradicted deposition testimony that he fell off a ladder while working with a drill when the ladder moved as a result of the drill vibrations, and that the ladder did not have proper braces to prevent such movement (see, Gordon v. Eastern Ry. Supply, 82 N.Y.2d 555, 560-562, 606 N.Y.S.2d 127, 626 N.E.2d 912; MacNair v. Salamon, 199 A.D.2d 170, 606 N.Y.S.2d 152). Further, since there is no evidence that either the construction manager or the prime contractor controlled plaintiff's work, their cross motions for indemnification against plaintiff's employer should have been granted (see, Mangano v. American Stock Exch., 234 A.D.2d 198, 651 N.Y.S.2d 494).
MEMORANDUM DECISION.
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: July 03, 1997
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)