Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Martin v. Siegfried Construction Co.

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

Decided May 18, 1962Published

1Concurrence

G-oldmau, J. (concurring).

I concur with the result reached by the majority because of the confusion created by that portion of the trial court’s charge dealing with the legal effect of Buies of the Board of Standards and Appeals of the Department of Labor and subdivision 4 of section 241 of the Labor Law. As ably set forth in the prevailing opinion, and as previously stated by this court in Utica Mut. Ins. Co. v. Mancini & Sons (9 A D 2d 116) violation of the rule would be only evidence of negligence per se. Absent this error in the charge I would vote to affirm the judgment for the plaintiff.

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Red Hook Cold Storage Co. v. Department of LaborNew York Court of Appeals · 1945
  2. Rufo v. OrlandoNew York Court of Appeals · 1955
  3. Employers' Liability Assurance Corp., Ltd., of London v. Post & McCord, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1941
  4. Drummond v. Alfred E. Norton Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1913
  5. Ithaca Trust Company v. . Driscoll Brothers CompanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1917

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

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

Powered by the Exa API