CompFox AI Summary
Plaintiff, an employee of F. W. Webb Company, was injured after falling down an unprotected basement stairwell while delivering a unit to a construction site in Warren County. He sued the property owner (defendant) under Labor Law §§ 200, 240 (1), and 241 (6), and common-law negligence. The Supreme Court denied plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment under Labor Law § 240 (1) and denied defendant's cross-motion for summary judgment regarding Labor Law §§ 200 and 241 (6) claims and common-law negligence. On appeal, the court found the defendant liable under Labor Law § 241 (6) due to the unprotected stairwell, stating the plaintiff was a protected worker. However, the court erred in denying defendant's cross-motion to dismiss claims under Labor Law § 200 and common-law negligence, as the defendant, as record owner, did not control the construction. Additionally, the court erred in denying Fava Plumbing & Heating, Inc.'s cross-motion for summary judgment, as Fava neither contributed to the injury nor controlled the worksite. The court affirmed that indemnification requests were premature, except for Fava.
Williams v. G.H. Development & Construction Co. 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, an employee of F. W. Webb Company, was injured after falling down an unprotected basement stairwell while delivering a unit to a construction site in Warren County. He sued the property owner (defendant) under Labor Law §§ 200, 240 (1), and 241 (6), and common-law negligence. The Supreme Court denied plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment under Labor Law § 240 (1) and denied defendant's cross-motion for summary judgment regarding Labor Law §§ 200 and 241 (6) claims and common-law negligence. On appeal, the court found the defendant liable under Labor Law § 241 (6) due to the unprotected stairwell, stating the plaintiff was a protected worker. However, the court erred in denying defendant's cross-motion to dismiss claims under Labor Law § 200 and common-law negligence, as the defendant, as record owner, did not control the construction. Additionally, the court erred in denying Fava Plumbing & Heating, Inc.'s cross-motion for summary judgment, as Fava neither contributed to the injury nor controlled the worksite. The court affirmed that indemnification requests were premature, except for Fava.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.