Legal Opinion
DePuy v. Sibley, Lindsay & Curr Co.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided March 8, 1996PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*1070Additionally, that part of the cross motion of defendants Mackies Van & Storage, Ltd., Coleman’s and North American Van Lines for summary judgment dismissing the Labor Law § 240 (1) cause of action should have been granted because they were subcontractors with no authority to direct, supervise or control plaintiff’s work (see, Russin v Picciano & Son, 54 NY2d 311, 316-318; Terranova v City of New York, 197 AD2d 402; Smith v Cassadaga Val. Cent. School Dist., 178 AD2d 955, 956-957). The fact that Coleman’s owned the ramps and its employee placed them does not, by itself, establish supervision…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Russin v. Louis N. Picciano & SonNew York Court of Appeals · 1981
- Gillmore v. DanielAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995
- Smith v. Cassadaga Valley Central School DistrictAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
- Terranova v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993
3Cited by17 opinions
- Tillman v. Triou's Custom Homes, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1999
- Dilluvio v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000
- Samuel v. A.T.P. Developent Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000
- Paul v. Ryan Homes, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2004
- Phelan v. StateAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.