Legal Opinion
Belding v. Verizon New York, Inc.
New York Court of Appeals
Decided February 18, 2010PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed with costs. The certified question should be answered in the affirmative.
Applying the bomb blast film to the lobby windows, in and of itself, qualifies as a significant alteration (see Labor Law § 240 [1]; Joblon v Solow, 91 NY2d 457, 465 [1998]). BlastGARD significantly altered the configuration or composition of the structure by changing the way the lobby windows react to explosions, impacts and the elements. The effects of this one-time security enhancement distinguish the activity from affixing an…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Joblon v. SolowNew York Court of Appeals · 1998
- Munoz v. DJZ Realty, LLCNew York Court of Appeals · 2005
3Cited by9 opinions
- Goodwin v. Dix Hills Jewish CenterAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2016
- Santiago v. Rusciano & Son, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- Custer v. JordanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
- Amendola v. Rheedlen 125th Street, LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
- Amendola v. Rheedlen 125th Street, LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.