| Robinson v Bond St. Levy, LLC |
| 2014 NY Slip Op 02026 [115 AD3d 928] |
| March 26, 2014 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| Peter Robinson et al., Respondents, v Bond StreetLevy, LLC, Appellant. (And a Third-Party Action.) |
—[*1] Asher & Associates, P.C., New York, N.Y. (Robert J. Poblete of counsel), forrespondents.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant, Bond StreetLevy, LLC, appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Vaughan, J.),dated July 25, 2012, which granted the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment on theissue of liability on the cause of action alleging a violation of Labor Law § 240(1).
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
On December 26, 2007, the plaintiff Peter Robinson (hereinafter the injuredplaintiff) was working as a laborer for Virginia Construction & Management, Inc., at abuilding located on Broadway in Manhattan (hereinafter the subject property). While hewas standing near the top of a 10-foot A-frame ladder and removing duct work from theceiling, a 10-foot long piece of metal duct work struck him in the back, knocking bothhim and the ladder to the ground. In January 2008, the injured plaintiff, and his wifesuing derivatively, commenced this action against the defendant, Bond Street Levy, LLC,the owner of the subject property. The plaintiffs moved for summary judgment on theissue of liability on the Labor Law § 240 (1) cause of action, and the SupremeCourt granted the motion.
"Labor Law § 240 (1) imposes upon owners and general contractors, and theiragents, a nondelegable duty to provide safety devices necessary to protect workers fromrisks inherent in elevated work sites" (McCarthy v Turner Constr., Inc., 17 NY3d 369, 374[2011]). To prevail on a Labor Law § 240 (1) cause of action, a plaintiff mustestablish that the statute was violated and that the violation was a proximate cause of hisor her injuries (see Blake vNeighborhood Hous. Servs. of N.Y. City, 1 NY3d 280, 287-289 [2003]). In acase such as this, involving a fall from a ladder, this showing may be made bydemonstrating that the subject ladder was defective or inadequately secured and that thedefect, or the failure to secure the ladder, was a substantial factor in causing the plaintiff'sinjuries (see Singh v City ofNew York, 113 AD3d 605 [2014]).
Here, the Supreme Court properly granted the plaintiffs' motion for summaryjudgment on the issue of liability on the Labor Law § 240 (1) cause of action. Theplaintiffs [*2]established the absence of adequate safetydevices to protect the injured plaintiff from falling (see Perez v NYC Partnership Hous. Dev. Fund Co., Inc., 55AD3d 419 [2008]; Hernandez v Bethel United Methodist Church of N.Y., 49AD3d 251 [2008]; Montalvo v J. Petrocelli Constr., Inc., 8 AD3d 173 [2004];Orellano v 29 E. 37th St. Realty Corp., 292 AD2d 289 [2002]) and that suchviolation of Labor Law § 240 (1) was a proximate cause of his injuries (see Poracki v St. Mary's R.C.Church, 82 AD3d 1192, 1194 [2011]). In opposition, the defendant failed toraise a triable issue of fact as to whether the injured plaintiff's actions were the soleproximate cause of the accident (see Canas v Harbour at Blue Point Home Owners Assn., Inc.,99 AD3d 962 [2012]; Leconte v 80 E. End Owners Corp., 80 AD3d 669 [2011];Sniadecki v Westfield Cent. School Dist., 272 AD2d 955 [2000]).
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the plaintiffs' motion was not premature. Thedefendant failed to demonstrate how further discovery may reveal or lead to relevantevidence or that facts essential to oppose the motion were exclusively within theknowledge or control of the plaintiffs (see Sealy v Clifton, LLC, 106 AD3d 981, 983 [2013]; Norero v 99-105 Third Ave.Realty, LLC, 96 AD3d 727, 728 [2012]). The mere hope or speculation thatevidence sufficient to defeat a motion for summary judgment may be uncovered duringthe discovery process is insufficient to deny the motion (see Cajas-Romero v Ward, 106AD3d 850 [2013]; Buchinger v Jazz Leasing Corp., 95 AD3d 1053 [2012]; Seawright v Port Auth. of N.Y. &N.J., 90 AD3d 1017 [2011]). Eng, P.J., Dillon, Maltese and Duffy, JJ., concur.