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.
Jaroslaw KARAS, et al., Appellants, v. M.A. ANGELIADES, INC., Respondent.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Schneier, J.), dated April 23, 2002, which, upon a jury verdict in favor of the defendant and upon the denial of their motion, inter alia, pursuant to CPLR 4401 for judgment as a matter of law, is in favor of the defendant and against them, in effect, dismissing the complaint.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
Contrary to the plaintiffs' contention, the Supreme Court properly denied their motion pursuant to CPLR 4401 for judgment as a matter of law. “Inasmuch as there are no specific statutory requirements with respect to what constitutes a violation of Labor Law § 240(1), the issue of whether ‘proper protection’ had been provided was an issue of fact for the jury” (Miller v. Long Is. Light. Co., 166 A.D.2d 564, 560 N.Y.S.2d 847; see Kalofonos v. State of New York, 104 A.D.2d 75, 78, 481 N.Y.S.2d 415). Where the plaintiff did not allege that the ladder broke, the ladder he fell from was firmly secured, and there is evidence of a second secured ladder for accessing the work site, it was for the jury to determine whether proper protection was provided within the meaning of Labor Law § 240(1) (see Eckhoff v. Consolidated Edison Co. of N.Y., 214 A.D.2d 698, 699, 625 N.Y.S.2d 604).
The denial of the plaintiffs' motion to set aside the verdict was based upon a fair interpretation of the evidence (see CPLR 4404; Nicastro v. Park, 113 A.D.2d 129, 134, 495 N.Y.S.2d 184).
The plaintiffs' remaining contentions either are unpreserved for appellate review or without merit.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: April 21, 2003
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second 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)