Legal Opinion

Phillips v.Eastman Kodak Co.

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

Decided May 27, 1994PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

—Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly granted plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment on the Labor Law § 240 (1) cause of action. While working on construction of a sewer tunnel 80 feet below the surface of defendant’s parking lot, plaintiff was struck by a wooden board that fell from a work site in a shaft approximately 60 feet above him. Defendant, as the grantor of an easement for construction of that tunnel, remained the fee owner, and thus, was an "owner” within the meaning of Labor Law § 240 (1) (see, Gordon v Eastern Ry. Supply, 82 NY2d 555,…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Gordon v. Eastern Railway Supply, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1993
  2. Celestine v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
  3. Celestine v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1982
  4. Kerr v. Rochester Gas & Electric Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1985

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Williams v. LeChaseAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005
  2. Duffield v. Will's Equipment RepairAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2008

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

Powered by the Exa API