| Ricciardi v Bernard Janowitz Constr. Corp. |
| 2008 NY Slip Op 02132 [49 AD3d 624] |
| March 11, 2008 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| Christopher Ricciardi et al., Appellants, v BernardJanowitz Construction Corp. et al., Defendants and Third-Party Plaintiffs-Respondents. JME FireSprinkler Corp. et al., Third-Party Defendants-Respondents. |
—[*1] Michael E. Pressman, New York, N.Y., for defendant third-party plaintiff-respondentBernard Janowitz Construction Corp. John P. Humphreys, Melville, N.Y. (David R. Holland of counsel), for defendant third-partyplaintiff-respondent WJ Harbor Ridge, LLC. Lustig & Brown, LLP, New York, N.Y. (Thomas J. Moran of counsel), for third-partydefendant-respondent JME Fire Sprinkler Corp. Marshall, Conway & Wright, P.C., New York, N.Y. (Sue Soo-ha Yang and Amy S.Weissman of counsel), for third-party defendant-respondent All-Island Cleaning.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal, as limited bytheir brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Rosengarten, J.),entered December 5, 2007, as denied their motion for summary judgment on the issue of liabilityon the cause of action alleging a violation of Labor Law § 240 (1).
Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with one bill of costs,and the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability on the cause of actionalleging a violation of Labor Law § 240 (1) is granted.[*2]
The plaintiff Christopher Ricciardi (hereinafter theplaintiff) was injured when he fell from the seventh rung of an unsecured A-frame ladder whileinstalling a sprinkler system at a construction site. As he tightened an overhead pipe with awrench, the unsecured ladder began to slide and the front legs lifted off the ground, causing theplaintiff to fall backwards to the ground. Under these circumstances, the plaintiff established hisprima facie entitlement to summary judgment on the issue of liability pursuant to Labor Law§ 240 (1) (see Argueta v PomonaPanorama Estates, Ltd., 39 AD3d 785, 786 [2007]; Rivera v Dafna Constr. Co., Ltd., 27 AD3d 545 [2006]; Chlap v 43rd St.-Second Ave. Corp.,18 AD3d 598 [2005]; Granillo vDonna Karen Co., 17 AD3d 531 [2005]; Loreto v 376 St. Johns Condominium, Inc., 15 AD3d 454, 455[2005]; Scotti v Federation Dev. Corp., 289 AD2d 322, 323 [2001]; Guzman vGumley-Haft, Inc., 274 AD2d 555, 556 [2000]; cf. Bland v Manocherian, 66 NY2d452, 460 [1985]).
In opposition, the respondents failed to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether the plaintiff'sconduct was the sole proximate cause of the accident (see Argueta v Pomona PanoramaEstates, Ltd., 39 AD3d at 786; Chlap v 43rd St.-Second Ave. Corp., 18 AD3d 598 [2005]; Wallace v Stonehenge Group, 1 AD3d589, 590 [2003]; compare Blake vNeighborhood Hous. Servs. of N.Y. City, 1 NY3d 280, 291 [2003]) or as to whether thefailure to properly secure the ladder was not a substantial factor leading to the plaintiff's injuries(see Guzman v Gumley-Haft, Inc., 274 AD2d at 556). Accordingly, the Supreme Courterred in denying the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability on thecause of action alleging a violation of Labor Law § 240 (1). Skelos, J.P., Fisher, Covelloand Eng, JJ., concur.