Schroeder v Kalenak Painting & Paperhanging, Inc.

2006 NY Slip Op 06317

Decided on August 29, 2006

Court of Appeals

This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on August 29, 2006
No. 162 SSM 21






Submitted by Sareer A. Fazili, for appellant.
Submitted by Robert J. Burke, for respondent Kalenak
Painting & Paperhanging, Inc.
Submitted by Sandra L. Holihan, for respondent
Massry.


MEMORANDUM:

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.

Plaintiff concedes that wallpapering is not an enumerated activity under the Labor [*2]Law (see Labor Law § 240[1]). Moreover, plaintiff fails to allege sufficient facts to establish that her work was part of a larger renovation project subject to coverage under the statute (see Martinez v City of New York, 93 NY2d 322, 326 [1999]; cf. Prats v Port Auth. of New York and New Jersey, 100 NY2d 878 [2003]). Plaintiff's section 241(6) argument is similarly without merit.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules, order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum. Chief Judge Kaye and Judges G.B. Smith, Ciparick, Rosenblatt, Graffeo, Read and
R.S. Smith concur.
Decided August 29, 2006