Legal Opinion
Perrino v. Entergy Nuclear Indian Point 3, LLC
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided February 5, 2008PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*230Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Judith J. Gische, J.), entered May 22, 2007, which, to the extent appealed from, denied so much of defendants’ motion as sought summary judgment dismissing the claim based on Labor Law § 200, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Labor Law § 200 is a codification of the common-law duty imposed upon an owner or general contractor to provide construction workers with a safe work site (Comes v New York State Elec. & Gas Corp., 82 NY2d 876, 877 [1993]). “An implicit precondition to this duty ... is that the party charged with that responsibility have the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Comes v. New York State Electric & Gas Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1993
- Russin v. Louis N. Picciano & SonNew York Court of Appeals · 1981
3Cited by6 opinions
- Cappabianca v. Skanska USA Building Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- Torkel v. NYU Hospitals CenterAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2009
- Torres v. Love Lane Mews, LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2017
- Hammer v. ACC Constr. Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2021
- Hammer v. ACC Constr. Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2021
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.