| Miller v Yeshiva Zichron Mayir Gedola |
| 2007 NY Slip Op 08202 [44 AD3d 1017] |
| October 30, 2007 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| Benzion Miller et al., Respondents, v Yeshiva ZichronMayir Gedola et al., Defendants, and Dynamic Air Flow Mechanical Corp.,Appellant. |
—[*1] Kelner and Kelner, New York, N.Y. (Gail S. Kelner of counsel), for respondents.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant Dynamic Air FlowMechanical Corp. appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County(Kramer, J.), dated June 26, 2006, as granted that branch of the plaintiffs' cross motion whichwas for summary judgment on the issue of liability on their Labor Law § 240 (1) cause ofaction and denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the causes of action to recoverdamages based on Labor Law § 240 (1), § 241 (6), and § 200 andcommon-law negligence.
Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
A subcontractor will be held liable under Labor Law § 240 (1) where it has become anagent of the owner or general contractor (see Russin v Louis N. Picciano & Son, 54NY2d 311, 317-318 [1981]; Stevenson v Alfredo, 277 AD2d 218, 220 [2000]). Here, theplaintiffs established their prima facie entitlement to summary judgment on their Labor Law§ 240 (1) cause of action by demonstrating, inter alia, that the appellant Dynamic Air FlowMechanical Corp. (hereinafter Dynamic) had the authority to supervise and control the workwhich gave rise to the injured plaintiff's injuries, and thus was a statutory agent of the owner orgeneral contractor (see Stevenson v Alfredo, 277 AD2d 218, 220 [2000]; Sog vG.S.E. Dynamics, 239 AD2d 489, 491 [1997]; McGlynn v Brooklyn Hosp.-CaledonianHosp., 209 AD2d 486 [1994]). In opposition, Dynamic failed to raise a triable issue of fact.Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted that branch of the plaintiffs' cross motionwhich was for [*2]summary judgment on their Labor Law§ 240 (1) cause of action.
Dynamic's remaining contentions are without merit. Rivera, J.P., Krausman, Florio andDillon, JJ., concur.