Legal Opinion
Misseritti v. Mark IV Construction Co.
New York Court of Appeals
Decided October 31, 1995PublishedCited by 182 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Ciparick, J.
The issue presented on this appeal is whether plaintiff was entitled to summary judgment on her Labor Law § 240 (1) cause of action based upon the absence of any "bracing” on the fire wall that collapsed at the construction site where her husband was working. We conclude that the collapse of the fire wall is the type of "ordinary and usual” peril a worker is commonly exposed to at a construction site and not an elevation-related risk subject to the safeguards prescribed by Labor Law § 240 (1).
According to the complaint, plaintiff’s decedent was a mason employed…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Ross v. Curtis-Palmer Hydro-Electric Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1993
- Rocovich v. Consolidated Edison Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1991
- Zimmer v. Chemung County Performing Arts, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1985
- Bland v. ManocherianNew York Court of Appeals · 1985
- Haimes v. New York Telephone Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1978
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by182 opinions
- Narducci v. Manhasset Bay AssociatesNew York Court of Appeals · 2001
- Wilinski v. 334 East 92nd Housing Development Fund Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 2011
- Melber v. 6333 Main Street, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1998
- Alvia v. Teman Electrical Contracting, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2001
- Melo v. Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1998
177 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.