Steven M. Gates v State of New York

Annotate this Case
Gates v State of New York 2006 NY Slip Op 03182 [28 AD3d 1067] April 28, 2006 Appellate Division, Fourth Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. As corrected through Wednesday, June 21, 2006

Steven M. Gates et al., Respondents, v State of New York, Appellant. (Claim No. 107541.) (Appeal No. 1.)

—[*1]Appeal from a judgment of the Court of Claims (Richard E. Sise, J.), entered December 9, 2004 in a personal injury action. The interlocutory judgment granted claimants' motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of liability pursuant to Labor Law § 240 (1) and denied defendant's cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the Labor Law § 240 (1) and § 241 (6) claims.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Defendant contends in appeal Nos. 1 and 2 that the Court of Claims erred in granting the motions of the respective claimants seeking partial summary judgment on the issue of liability with respect to the Labor Law § 240 (1) claims and in denying those parts of defendant's cross motions seeking summary judgment dismissing those claims. Defendant further contends that the court erred in denying those parts of its cross motions seeking summary judgment dismissing the Labor Law § 241 (6) claims. Defendant's contentions herein were previously before us on appeals by defendant with respect to the claimants in other actions arising from the same accident, i.e., the collapse of the bridge on which the claimants were working. We affirm the judgments in appeal Nos. 1 and 2 for the reasons stated in our decision in Bradford v State of New York (17 AD3d 995 [2005]), in which we affirmed the judgments in those prior appeals. Present—Pigott, Jr., P.J., Kehoe, Martoche, Smith and Pine, JJ.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.