Legal Opinion
Enderby v. Keppler
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided June 5, 1992PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly granted plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment against defendant Polick, the general contractor, on the issue of defendant’s liability under Labor Law § 240 (1). Polick presented an estimate for the cost of the work, controlled the work and received payment for it. Labor Law § 240 (1) imposes a nondelegable duty on the general contractor to provide proper scaffolding and safety equipment and imposes absolute liability for a failure to do so (Heath v Soloff Constr., 107 AD2d 507, 510-511). Polick’s contention that…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Cannon v. PutnamNew York Court of Appeals · 1990
- Heath v. Soloff Construction, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1985
- Lister Electric, Inc. v. Incorporated Village of CedarhurstAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1985
3Cited by6 opinions
- Earsing v. NelsonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995
- Bartoo v. BuellAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993
- Catamount Enterprises Ltd. v. Town of Lyons AssessorsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
- Bartoo v. BuellAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993
- Bartoo v. BuellAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.