Legal Opinion

Pietrowski v. Are-East River Science Park, LLC

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided July 21, 2011PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The motion court erred in granting summary judgment to plaintiffs on their Labor Law § 240 (1) claim since there are triable issues of fact with respect to what proximately caused plaintiff Richard Pietrowski’s accident.* It is well settled that “[l]iability under section 240 (1) does not attach when the safety devices that plaintiff alleges were absent were readily available at the work site . . . and plaintiff knew he was expected to use them but for no good reason chose not to do so, causing an accident” (Gallagher v New York Post, 14 NY3d 83, 88 [2010]; Robinson v East Med. Ctr., LP, 6…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Cahill v. TRIBOROUGHNew York Court of Appeals · 2004
  2. Robinson v. East Medical CenterNew York Court of Appeals · 2006
  3. Gallagher v. New York PostNew York Court of Appeals · 2010
  4. Emmi v. EmmiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
  5. Garlow v. Chappaqua Central School DistrictAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Vargas v. 1166 LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2022
  2. Imbriale v. Richter & Ratner Contracting Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
  3. Imbriale v. Richter & Ratner Contracting Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API