CompFox Logo
AboutWorkflowFeaturesPricingCase LawInsights

Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. 2023 NY Slip Op 00951 [213 AD3d 555]
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 21, 2023

Francis v. 3475 Third Ave. Owner Realty, LLC

Plaintiff Benedict Francis appealed the denial of his motion for summary judgment on Labor Law §§ 240 (1) and 241 (6) claims against various defendants, and the granting of summary judgment to 3475 Third Avenue MM LLC dismissing the complaint. The appellate court found that the plaintiff made a prima facie showing of entitlement to summary judgment on his Labor Law § 240 (1) claim, as his testimony indicated his injuries were proximately caused by the collapse of unsecured scaffold planks, leading to a 16-foot fall. The court rejected the defendants' argument that plaintiff was the sole proximate cause, reiterating that a statutory violation precludes such a defense. Consequently, the court modified the order to grant plaintiff's motion on the Labor Law § 240 (1) claim against 3475 Third Avenue Owner Realty, LLC, Real Builders, Inc., and 3475 Third Avenue Housing Development Fund, and otherwise affirmed the lower court's decision, thus not needing to address the Labor Law § 241 (6) claim.

Scaffold CollapseSummary JudgmentProximate CauseRecalcitrant Worker DefenseStatutory ViolationConstruction AccidentWorkplace SafetyAppellate ReviewPersonal Injury ClaimProperty Owner Liability
References
3
Case No. 2021 NY Slip Op 01354
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 09, 2021

Deschaine v. Tricon Constr., LLC

The New York Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed an order which granted motions to renew filed by third-party plaintiffs Dollar Tree Stores, Inc., Michael Boyle, and Tricon Construction, LLC along with C.P. Plaza Limited Partnership. The motions sought to vacate a previous order that had dismissed their third-party claims for contribution and common-law indemnification against AMZ Construction Services, Inc. Upon renewal, these claims were reinstated. The court found that new expert reports submitted by the plaintiff, Robert Deschaine, raised a factual dispute regarding whether he sustained a 'grave injury' as defined by Workers' Compensation Law § 11, specifically brain injuries that rendered him unemployable in any capacity. This issue of fact justified the renewal and reinstatement of the third-party claims.

Appellate PracticeRenewal MotionSummary JudgmentContribution ClaimsIndemnification ClaimsGrave InjuryWorkers' Compensation LawBrain InjuriesUnemployabilityProcedural Law
References
2
Case No. 2024 NY Slip Op 01279 [227 AD3d 113]
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 12, 2024

Torres-Quito v. 1711 LLC

Plaintiff Johnny Torres-Quito sustained head injuries from a falling brick while assisting in unloading ductwork at a construction site. The accident occurred in a delivery zone directly below an exterior scaffold where masonry work was ongoing, with no horizontal netting or overhead protection in place. The Appellate Division, First Department, modified the motion court's order, granting plaintiff summary judgment on his Labor Law § 240 (1) claim due to the lack of adequate safety devices. The court dismissed the Labor Law § 241 (6) and § 200 claims against Ryder and the third third-party complaint against CRSG, while also granting conditional summary judgment to 1711 and Ryder on their contractual indemnification claim against P.I. Mechanical Corp. (PIMC).

Construction AccidentFalling ObjectLabor Law 240(1)Summary JudgmentProximate CauseSafety DevicesContractual IndemnificationSubcontractor NegligenceGeneral Contractor LiabilityAppellate Division
References
18
Case No. 2025 NY Slip Op 03149 [238 AD3d 619]
Regular Panel Decision
May 22, 2025

Sarante v. Courtlandt Dev., LLC

The Appellate Division, First Department, modified an order from Supreme Court, Bronx County, concerning a construction worker's injury. Plaintiff Jose Sarante was injured when a chain block pulley system, used to hoist a steel beam, collapsed. The court affirmed partial summary judgment for Sarante on his Labor Law § 240 (1) claim, finding the pulley system to be a failed safety device. It also affirmed the denial of summary judgment for defendants Courtlandt Development, LLC and AB Capstone Builders Corp. on their Labor Law claims and contractual indemnification claims against third-party defendant Gold Lion Steel, LLC, noting the right to indemnification had not vested. Gold Lion's motions for dismissal of third-party claims were denied due to lack of evidence regarding "grave injury" under Workers' Compensation Law § 11. Finally, the Labor Law § 241 (6) claim was dismissed as plaintiff decided not to pursue it.

Labor Law § 240(1)Falling ObjectSafety DeviceChain Block Pulley SystemContractual IndemnificationDuty to DefendDuty to IndemnifyBreach of ContractFailure to Procure InsuranceGrave Injury
References
8
Case No. 2025 NYSlipOp 07220
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 23, 2025

Cerda v. Cydonia W71, LLC

The Appellate Division, First Department, addressed a personal injury case involving Petronilo Pena Cerda, who was injured due to an unsecured plank on a scaffold. The Supreme Court had granted Cerda partial summary judgment on his Labor Law § 240 (1) claim against Cydonia W71, LLC and CCNY Construction Inc., and denied various summary judgment motions by the defendants and third-party defendants regarding liability and contractual indemnification. The appellate court modified the order, conditionally granting Cydonia and CCNY summary judgment on their contractual indemnification claim against Standard Waterproofing Corp., while otherwise affirming the lower court's decision. The court found that Cerda established his prima facie burden, noting that the bicycle plank required securing, and dismissed arguments regarding plaintiff's credibility or sole proximate cause. Issues of fact concerning Standard's negligence prevented outright summary judgment on its indemnification claim against Xuntos Construction Corp.

Labor Law § 240 (1)Safe Place to WorkElevation-Related HazardScaffolding AccidentContractual IndemnificationVicarious LiabilitySummary Judgment MotionAppellate ReviewNegligenceProximate Cause
References
8
Case No. 2018 NY Slip Op 04859 [162 AD3d 1673]
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 29, 2018

Kipp v. Marinus Homes, Inc.

Plaintiff Robert Kipp commenced an action seeking damages for injuries sustained after falling from a ladder on a construction project, alleging a violation of Labor Law § 240 (1). The Supreme Court, Oneida County, denied Kipp's motion for partial summary judgment and partially denied motions by defendants and a third-party defendant seeking to dismiss the complaint. On appeal, the Appellate Division, Fourth Department, modified the order. The Appellate Division granted the defendants' and third-party defendant's motions, dismissing the Labor Law § 240 (1) claim against the defendants. The court determined that the plaintiff's own conduct was the sole proximate cause of his injuries because adequate safety devices were available, and he either misused or failed to properly use them, despite his claims about ladder placement. The dissenting opinion argued against finding sole proximate cause given the nondelegable duty to properly place safety devices.

Construction AccidentLadder FallLabor Law ViolationSole Proximate CauseSafety DevicesSummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewContractual IndemnificationThird-Party ActionWorker Negligence
References
11
Case No. 2016 NY Slip Op 04809 [140 AD3d 532]
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 16, 2016

Masi v. Cassone Trailer & Container Co.

The Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed an order from the Supreme Court, Bronx County, which denied motions for summary judgment by defendant Cassone Leasing Inc. and third-party defendant LKQ Hunts Point Auto Parts Corp. The case involved Anthony Masi's personal injury claims against various defendants, including Cassone Trailer & Container Co. and Cassone Leasing Inc. The court clarified that a prior settlement agreement under Workers' Compensation Law § 32, entered into by Masi and his employer LKQ, only settled workers' compensation claims and did not release personal injury claims against other defendants. Furthermore, a subsequent broad release agreement between Masi and LKQ released claims solely in favor of LKQ, not extending to other defendants in the personal injury suit. The court did not address whether the release barred third-party actions against LKQ, as that issue was not raised below.

Summary judgmentPersonal injury claimsWorkers' Compensation LawSettlement agreementRelease agreementThird-party actionsAppellate reviewDismissal motionScope of releaseEmployer liability
References
1
Case No. 2023 NY Slip Op 02204 [215 AD3d 1236]
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 28, 2023

Carpentieri v. 1438 S. Park Ave. Co., LLC

Plaintiff Michael Carpentieri sustained injuries from an electric shock while performing remodeling work at a grocery store. He brought actions for common-law negligence and violations of Labor Law §§ 200, 240(1), and 241(6) against the property owner, 1438 South Park Avenue Co., LLC, and the lessee, Tops Markets, LLC. Defendants subsequently initiated a third-party action against plaintiff's employer, Industrial Power & Lighting Corp., seeking contractual indemnification. The Supreme Court's order partially granted and denied summary judgment motions. The Appellate Division modified the order, reinstating the common-law negligence and Labor Law § 200 claims against defendants and the third-party defendant, finding that they failed to establish as a matter of law that they did not create or have notice of the dangerous condition. The court also affirmed the denial of summary judgment on the Labor Law § 241(6) claim and the third-party contractual indemnification claim due to unresolved factual issues regarding proximate cause and the retroactive intent of the indemnification agreement.

Summary JudgmentCommon-law NegligenceLabor Law § 200Labor Law § 240(1)Labor Law § 241(6)Industrial Code ViolationsProximate CauseContractual IndemnificationRetroactive AgreementDangerous Condition
References
12
Case No. 2022 NY Slip Op 05756 [209 AD3d 495]
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 13, 2022

Lopez v. 157-161 E. 28th St., LLC

This case involves an appeal concerning the dismissal of second third-party claims for breach of contract, unpaid overtime wages, and breach of constructive trust related to a construction project. The Appellate Division affirmed the Supreme Court's decision, determining that New Wave Contracting Corp., a subcontractor, was the direct employer of the individual second third-party plaintiffs, not the general contractors Iceberg Developing Co., LLC and Forkosh Construction Co., Inc. The court also found that signed lien waivers and releases by the individual second third-party plaintiffs validly barred their wage and contract claims, as payment was accepted without objection. Furthermore, constructive trust claims were correctly dismissed due to the lack of contractual privity between the individual second third-party plaintiffs and the general contractors.

Construction ProjectSubcontractor LiabilityWage ClaimsLien LawSummary JudgmentEmployer-Employee RelationshipContractual PrivityRelease WaiverAppellate ReviewThird-Party Claims
References
8
Case No. 2019 NY Slip Op 05955 [174 AD3d 850]
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 31, 2019

Davies v. Simon Prop. Group, Inc.

The plaintiff, Gerald Davies, was injured while pushing a cart of concrete over a plywood sheet that covered a hole at a construction site. He initiated an action against the premises operator, Simon Property Group, Inc., the general contractor, E.W. Howell Co., LLC, and the sidewalk removal company, Ruttura & Sons Construction Co., Inc., alleging common-law negligence and violations of Labor Law §§ 200, 240 (1), and 241 (6). E.W. Howell Co., LLC also filed a third-party action against Allstate Interior Demolition Corporation, the plaintiff's employer, seeking contractual indemnification. The Supreme Court's initial order, which partially granted and denied various summary judgment motions, was subject to appeals and cross-appeals. The Appellate Division ultimately reversed the order in part, granting Ruttura & Sons Construction Co., Inc.'s motion for summary judgment on the Labor Law § 200 and common-law negligence claims, and denying Simon Property Group, Inc. and E.W. Howell Co., LLC.'s motion to dismiss the Labor Law §§ 240 (1) and 241 (6) causes of action. The Appellate Division affirmed the denial of Simon Property Group, Inc. and E.W. Howell Co., LLC.'s motion concerning Labor Law § 200, common-law negligence, and contractual indemnification.

Personal InjuryConstruction AccidentLabor LawPremises LiabilitySummary JudgmentContractual IndemnificationElevation DifferentialScaffold LawIndustrial CodeSafe Work Environment
References
15
Showing 1-10 of 13,384 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

CompFox Logo

The AI standard for workers' compensation professionals. Faster research, deeper analysis, better outcomes.

Product

  • Platform
  • Workflow
  • Features
  • Pricing

Solutions

  • Defense Firms
  • Applicants' Attorneys
  • Insurance carriers
  • Medical Providers

Company

  • About
  • Insights
  • Case Law

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms
  • Trust
  • Cookies
  • Subscription

© 2026 CompFox Inc. All rights reserved.

Systems Operational