Legal Opinion

Burton v. CW Equities, LLC

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

Decided February 14, 2012PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Contrary to defendants’ contention, the fact that the concrete walkway from which plaintiff John Burton fell was a permanent structure does not remove it from the coverage of Labor Law § 240 (1). The walkway provided access to the rear yard of the building under construction, extending over an approximately 15-foot-deep vaulted area below grade level. However, it had no guard rails or other barriers. Thus, “plaintiffs injuries were the direct consequence of a failure to provide adequate protection against a risk arising from a physically significant elevation differential” (see Runner v New…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Gordon v. American Museum of Natural HistoryNew York Court of Appeals · 1986
  2. Runner v. New York Stock Exchange, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 2009
  3. McCarthy v. Turner Construction, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 2011
  4. Urban v. No. 5 Times Square Development, LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2009
  5. Noetzell v. Park Avenue Hall Housing Development Fund Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Burton v. CW Equities, LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
  2. Burton v. CW Equities, LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012

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

Powered by the Exa API