CompFox AI Summary
Plaintiff appealed an order granting summary judgment to defendants in a personal injury and wrongful death action. The case involved the fatal heart attack of plaintiff's decedent at a renovation site allegedly owned by 26 Mississippi Street LLC, with Savarino Construction Corporation as the construction manager. The Supreme Court dismissed the complaint, finding 26 Mississippi did not own the building and Savarino Construction lacked control over the work site, negating claims under Labor Law § 200 and common-law negligence. The appellate court affirmed, also dismissing the Labor Law § 241 (6) cause of action due to the plaintiff's failure to cite a qualifying Industrial Code provision. The court further agreed that Savarino Construction was not a statutory agent of an owner or contractor, warranting dismissal of Labor Law claims against them.
Miller v. Savarino Construction Corp. is a workers' compensation case decided in Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York. This case addresses legal issues related to compensation claims, benefits, and court rulings.
It is commonly referenced in legal research involving workers' compensation laws in Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
Plaintiff appealed an order granting summary judgment to defendants in a personal injury and wrongful death action. The case involved the fatal heart attack of plaintiff's decedent at a renovation site allegedly owned by 26 Mississippi Street LLC, with Savarino Construction Corporation as the construction manager. The Supreme Court dismissed the complaint, finding 26 Mississippi did not own the building and Savarino Construction lacked control over the work site, negating claims under Labor Law § 200 and common-law negligence. The appellate court affirmed, also dismissing the Labor Law § 241 (6) cause of action due to the plaintiff's failure to cite a qualifying Industrial Code provision. The court further agreed that Savarino Construction was not a statutory agent of an owner or contractor, warranting dismissal of Labor Law claims against them.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.