Berrios v. 735 Avenue of the Americas, LLC
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
Defendants argue, for the first time on appeal, that Labor Law § 240 (1) is inapplicable to the facts of this case because there was no collapse of a scaffold. However, even if plaintiff was working on what would become a permanent part of the building, he was exposed to an elevation-related hazard; hé is therefore entitled to the protection of the statute (see e.g. John v Baharestani, 281 AD2d 114, 119 [2001]). The I-beams, ribs, and plywood that, together with concrete, would become the second floor “served, conceptually and functionally, as an elevated platform or scaffold” (Becerra v City…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Zuckerman v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1980
- Blake v. Neighborhood Housing Services of New York City, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 2003
- Gallagher v. New York PostNew York Court of Appeals · 2010
- Aragon v. 233 West 21st Street, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
- John v. BaharestaniAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2001
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- THOMPSON, WILLIAM R. v. SITHE/INDEPENDENCE LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
- Cross v. CIM Group, LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2017
- Rubio v. New York Proton Mgt., LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2021
- Rubio v. New York Proton Mgt., LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2021
- Fraser v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2018
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.