Monioudis v City of New York
2011 NY Slip Op 01985 [82 AD3d 945]
March 15, 2011
Appellate Division, Second Department
As corrected through Wednesday, May 11, 2011


Symeon Monioudis, Respondent,
v
City of New York,Appellant. (And a Third-Party Action.)

[*1]Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Pamela Seider Dolgowand John Hogrogian of counsel), for appellant.

Argyropoulos & Bender, Astoria, N.Y. (Susan E. Paulovich of counsel), forrespondent.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant appeals from an order ofthe Supreme Court, Kings County (R. Miller, J.), dated September 10, 2009, which granted theplaintiff's motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability on the cause of action pursuantto Labor Law § 240 (1).

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiff was working in a courthouse owned by the defendant and using a ladder toprepare the walls and ceiling for painting when the ladder collapsed, causing him to fall andsustain injuries.

The plaintiff established, prima facie, his entitlement to judgment as a matter of law on theissue of liability on the cause of action alleging a violation of Labor Law § 240 (1) bysubmitting his deposition testimony, which demonstrated that he fell when the ladder he wasusing collapsed, and that the failure to provide a secure ladder proximately caused his injuries(see Gordon v Eastern Ry. Supply, 82 NY2d 555, 561-562 [1993]; McCaffery v Wright & Co. Constr.,Inc., 71 AD3d 842, 843 [2010]; Yin Min Zhu v Triple L. Group, LLC, 64 AD3d 590 [2009]; Gilhooly v Dormitory Auth. of State ofN.Y., 51 AD3d 719, 720 [2008]; Rivera v Dafna Constr. Co., Ltd., 27 AD3d 545 [2006]).

In opposition, the defendant failed to raise a triable issue of fact. The defendant did not offerany evidence, only mere speculation, to oppose the prima facie case or create a bona fide issueregarding the plaintiff's credibility as to a material fact (see Klein v City of New York, 89NY2d 833, 835 [1996]; McCaffery v Wright & Co. Constr., Inc., 71 AD3d at 843; Barr v 157 5 Ave., LLC, 60 AD3d796, 797-798 [2009]; Rivera v Dafna Constr. Co., Ltd., 27 AD3d at 545-546; cf. Duran v Kijak Family Partners,L.P., 63 AD3d 992, 994 [2009]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted theplaintiff's motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability on the cause of action pursuantto Labor Law § 240 (1). Angiolillo, J.P., Florio, Belen and Austin, JJ., concur. [PriorCase History: 24 Misc 3d 1248(A), 2009 NY Slip Op 51921(U).]


NYPTI Decisions © 2026 is a project of New York Prosecutors Training Institute (NYPTI) made possible by leveraging the work we've done providing online research and tools to prosecutors.

NYPTI would like to thank New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services, New York State Senate's Open Legislation Project, New York State Unified Court System, New York State Law Reporting Bureau and Free Law Project for their invaluable assistance making this project possible.

Install the free RECAP extensions to help contribute to this archive. See https://free.law/recap/ for more information.