SALON v. MILLINERY SYNDICATE INC (2008)

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Vaughan, J.), dated November 29, 2006, which granted the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability on the Labor Law § 240(1) cause of action.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

 The defendants, Millinery Syndicate, Inc., and Steinberg & Poloik Management Corp., are the owner and manager, respectively, of a building located on West 39th Street in Manhattan.   While performing painting work in the defendants' building, the plaintiff was injured when the unsecured ladder upon which he was standing shifted and it fell to the floor.   Under these circumstances, the plaintiff established, prima face, that the defendants violated their statutory duty pursuant to Labor Law § 240(1), and that the violation was a proximate cause of the plaintiff's injuries (see Blake v. Neighborhood Hous. Servs. of N.Y. City, Inc., 1 N.Y.3d 280, 771 N.Y.S.2d 484, 803 N.E.2d 757;  Hanna v. Gellman, 29 A.D.3d 953, 815 N.Y.S.2d 713;  Loreto v. 376 St. Johns Condominium, Inc., 15 A.D.3d 454, 790 N.Y.S.2d 190;  Bryan v. City of New York, 206 A.D.2d 448, 614 N.Y.S.2d 554).   In opposition, the defendants failed to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether there was a statutory violation, or whether the plaintiff's own acts or omissions were the sole cause of the accident (see Blake v. Neighborhood Hous. Servs. of N.Y. City, Inc., 1 N.Y.3d 280, 771 N.Y.S.2d 484, 803 N.E.2d 757).   Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability on his Labor Law § 240(1) cause of action (see Loreto v. 376 St. Johns Condominium, Inc., 15 A.D.3d 454, 790 N.Y.S.2d 190;  Mannes v. Kamber Mgt., 284 A.D.2d 310, 726 N.Y.S.2d 440).

 Furthermore, the defendants' “mere hope that further discovery will reveal something helpful to their case provides no basis for postponing the determination of the plaintiff's motion” (Public Administrator of Kings County v. Tomassetti, 271 A.D.2d 515, 706 N.Y.S.2d 350;  see Lopez v. WS Distribution, 34 A.D.3d 759, 825 N.Y.S.2d 516).