Rowe v Memorial Hosp. for Cancer & Allied Diseases

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Rowe v Memorial Hosp. for Cancer & Allied Diseases 2020 NY Slip Op 35391(U) October 28, 2020 Supreme Court, Kings County Docket Number: Index No. 523892/17 Judge: Carolyn E. Wade Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip Op 30001(U), are republished from various New York State and local government sources, including the New York State Unified Court System's eCourts Service. This opinion is uncorrected and not selected for official publication. INDEX NO. 523892/2017 FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 11/05/2020 -NYSCEF ,DOC. - - -~ NO. 54 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/12/2020 of the upreme Colll!1 of th St o \ York held in an , for th County of Kings, a ilie ounh use Joe .ted at Ci ic Cent.er, Brooklyn. w Y,ork on h 2 th day of October 2020 PRES£. T: HO . CAROL E. WAD I Ju fc,; - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - -· - --- - - --------- l!!I __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ X JAMES ROWE, Plain itl: Index No. 523892/17 -againstDECISIO /ORDER EMO RIAL HO 'PITAL FOR C DISEASES and TURNER CO TR 1 De ----~----··---- - on 1d red · n the re · Recitation, as req ·r db Pl intiff" otion and Ddend o.t M,emo-111,ndum of L w,,,,11!11,,,, [* 1] !lllltl- • liHillH •••• 1 of 4 ••······ ..... u .. 6 of' INDEX NO. 523892/2017 FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 11/05/2020 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 54 Upon th RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/12/2020 or-egoing ci · d papers. Plaintiff moves for L o Serve an Atncnded erified Bill of Particulars and for Summary Judgm ot Pursuant to Labor Law 24 I) and nc-er & Allied Di,eases 1 and Turn r Construction § 241(6). D fondants Memori 1Hospital for Cornp.:my cro -move for Summ ry Judgmen di missing Plaintiffs Comp!aim. Th und rl. ing a tio damages for erious injmies th t he allegedly u tained on baker .scaffol.d to reco _r commenced by plaintiff J m 11 on him. At th tin e of th ov mber 2:9, 20] 7, ,; 1h n a double ci .-en , Plaintiff. a taper and dryw H finjsher, was lifting and moving the scaffold up a stain; se w·th his oo-wo ker. The con mcf on and renovation s'tc. located at 530 E, 74i1t Strc-et in New York, NYt was owned by d f. ndant moria[ hired o-defendant the cons:tnt ti n manager. Turner hired non Turner Const:ru tion Company r•Tumer") to, ct parry Compon nt Assembly y lem. who in tum retained Piaintif s employer, non~party Zapat Constroction the taper ubco · tractor. Plainlirt - Moti.on for · ummary .Jud.go, nt A a pre] nninary mat r di coun not hat the defend , a e not proffered a reasonable excu e for filing n untimely cros -motion. Thus th ir appJication i considered ol ]y to the extent that it opposes laintiff's motion for summary jud ment on his Labor L-aw 240 I) and 241 (6) (Ind stria Co 12 CRR_ · 23-l.2(a), ( ). and 3-5.E (h 1) claims. Tum ·n to Plainfff L bar Law§ 240()) claim, the t :utc requires owners contract.or , and th ir a ents to pmvide wo kers ith pro r afety d 2 [* 2] 2 of 4 ice to protect aga ·n t ' uch gravity- INDEX NO. 523892/2017 FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 11/05/2020 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 54 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/12/2020 related accid nt as fallin from a eight orb ·ng tru k by a faUin obje , that was irnprop rl ured" (Ross v. hoi t ·d or inadequately urtis-Palmer Hydro-Elec. o,, 1 NY2d 494,. 501 [199 ). In the instant ca - th partie • ubm" ion ccident occ rred. . ore ver, he divergen r-ov·d confli ting aunts as to how the pini ns o both parti s' xpert ngineers, Dougla Mill rt P.E. and Kel y •c tt, P. ., e.stab]ish lha.t triable issue of materi l c ists as to whethr.,r m ch.ani.ca:J means should h ve been provided to U t the scaffold up th '[airweU . Therefore, the b n h of P'la1intifr · m-ti, n d king summary j gm nt on bis L-abor Law 240(1) chtim is :ni d. 11 Labor Law 241 ( , imposes a nondclcgabJc duty of reasonabl re upon an owner or , n ral contractor to provid · rcasonabk and ad quate protection tow rkcr · and a violatio n plicit. and concrete proj r, on titutes som ri • f ion of the lndu In l Gode by a partic ·p nt in he cons ruction idem e of negligence or which the owne or cmeral ,contractor n b h ld vi,cariously !iabl " ( usca v. A & S Construction, LLC, 84 AD3d 1155 [2d Dept 2011.J). Plaintiff herein a ert that the defendant violated Industri~I Cod ·, 12 NYCRR §§ 2 t. 2(a), c), and 23-5. 1 (h . As noted b th d fend n ~ J2 CRR 2 -l .2(a), (e) are in th findings of fact" sect"on f he lndustria] Cod • and ha e been found t be too general to· upport a Labor Law 24 l ) claim (see Narrow v. rane-Hogan, 202 2d 841,842 [3d Dept .1994] [''we find that th r gu]ations alleged 12 YCRR l2-l.2(c), 23-l .5(a) and subpart 2 - , rel te to cacral safety umdards aed are nol ,on di.:6 ndanl" (citation 01 n r I specifications sufficien to impose jtt_d)]; see a o Morkya . Memorial loan K U ring Center. 0 NY 2d 225 [Sup Ct, N.Y., 'ty 2009]). Thus, th brnnch of P laintifrs Labor nw 241(6) clal n th t i premised on the violatio 1 of 12 YCRR · 2 -1.2(a), an.d (e) is hereby dismissed. [* 3] 3 of 4 INDEX NO. 523892/2017 FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 11/05/2020 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 54 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/12/2020 th bran h ofPlain itrs D l!ED ori.on for le e to Amend the Bill of Particul moo as it included a Labor L 2 1(6) claim premised on the two fndu ri 1 C ecfo ! 2 NYC RR § 23-5. lS(h) ( anuaUy~prop 11 cl mobile scaffolds) pro ides, in pert in nt pa_ s follows: '"Provisions shall be made. to prev nt such scaffolds fr.om tipping or fal ing durin their mov ment from one location to an :h r. caffolds shall be moved only n I v J Hoo, .or equivalent · urfaces fr,ee fr,om ob trucfon · and opening [ ...].."' H re ch parties dispute wh the th acciden w acei , mil , aused by the tipping/ du co Plaintiff's train fr-om th _ idden hi fling of the weight of th m of h ffold. to · hether the d!efondan · viofot dy. a triab]e issue of ma erial 2 NY RR, 23~5.18(h). Accordingly, based upon the above~ Plain iff' motion for summary judgment ' DENI .. D. The branch of Plaintiffs Labor L .w 241 ( ) clairn that is premised on he vj 2 ion of RR § 23-1.2(a), and (e) is hereby di mi , d. Defendants Cross-Motion is DE .I "D. Al ' :en aining oontc.ntions ha e b nm acul us1y ,e xamined, and ar,e rendered m nd/or moo . This constiru es the Decis ·on and Oro r ,o f he oon. I c_.: , {. r·· L [* 4] 4 of 4

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.