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.
Michael FINK, Plaintiff–Respondent, v. AL–SAR REALTY CORP. and 2870 Erie Boulevard Novelties & Gifts, Inc., Defendants–Appellants.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
It is hereby ORDERED that said appeal is unanimously dismissed without costs.
Memorandum: Plaintiff commenced this Labor Law and common-law negligence action seeking to recover damages for injuries that he sustained when he fell from a ladder while attempting to access an HVAC unit on the roof of a building allegedly owned by defendants. Supreme Court granted plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of liability pursuant to Labor Law § 240(1), denied those parts of defendants' cross motion seeking summary judgment dismissing the Labor Law §§ 240(1) and 241(6) claims, and granted those parts of defendants' cross motion seeking summary judgment dismissing the Labor Law § 200 claim and the common-law negligence causes of action. Defendants appeal.
“It is the obligation of the appellant to assemble a proper record on appeal. The record must contain all of the relevant papers that were before the Supreme Court” (Singh v. Getty Petroleum Corp., 275 A.D.2d 740, 740, 713 N.Y.S.2d 490 [2d Dept. 2000]; see CPLR 5526; Mergl v. Mergl, 19 A.D.3d 1146, 1147, 796 N.Y.S.2d 823 [4th Dept. 2005]). Here, defendants' appeal must be dismissed based on defendants' failure to provide an adequate record, including the failure to include the operative complaint, i.e., the amended complaint filed on July 3, 2017, which defendants seek to dismiss in their cross motion (see generally Mergl, 19 A.D.3d at 1147, 796 N.Y.S.2d 823).
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: 835
Decided: September 27, 2019
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth 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)