JOHN RODRIGUEZ, plf-ap, v. GILBANE/TDX JOINT VENTURE Defendants-res-ap, GILBANE, INC., def

8997. JOHN RODRIGUEZ, plf-ap, v. GILBANE/TDX JOINT VENTURE Defendants-res-ap, GILBANE, INC., def — GILBANE/TDX JOINT VENTURE THIRD-PARTY PLAINTIFFS- res-ap, GILBANE, INC., THIRD-PARTY PLAINTIFF, v. DIFAMA CONCRETE, INC., Third- Party def-res, ADMIRAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Third-Party def — GILBANE/ TDX JOINT VENTURE SECOND THIRD-PARTY PLAINTIFFS- res-ap, GILBANE, INC., SECOND THIRD-PARTY PLAINTIFF, v. DFC STRUCTURES, LLC, Second Third-Party def-res, ADMIRAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Second Third- Party def — Sacks and Sacks, LLP, New York (Scott N. Singer of counsel), for ap — O'Connor, O'Connor, Hintz & Deveney, LLP, Melville (Brian T. Deveney of counsel), for respondentsap — Litchfield Cavo LLP, New York (Michael K. Dvorkin of counsel), for res — Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Julia I. Rodriguez, J.), entered April 10, 2012, which, to the extent appealed from, denied plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of defendants Gilbane/TDX Joint Venture, Gilbane Inc., and TDX Construction Corp.'s (the Gilbane/TDX defendants) liability under Labor Law §240(1), granted, in part, the Gilbane/TDX defendants' cross motion for summary judgment dismissing plaintiffs complaint on the ground that the Gilbane/TDX defendants, as the construction manager, did not supervise, direct or control the plaintiff's work, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

8997. JOHN RODRIGUEZ, plf-ap, v. GILBANE/TDX JOINT VENTURE Defendants-res-ap, GILBANE, INC., def — GILBANE/TDX JOINT VENTURE THIRD-PARTY PLAINTIFFS- res-ap, GILBANE, INC., THIRD-PARTY PLAINTIFF, v. DIFAMA CONCRETE, INC., Third- Party def-res, ADMIRAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Third-Party def — GILBANE/ TDX JOINT VENTURE SECOND THIRD-PARTY PLAINTIFFS- res-ap, GILBANE, INC., SECOND THIRD-PARTY PLAINTIFF, v. DFC STRUCTURES, LLC, Second Third-Party def-res, ADMIRAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Second Third- Party def — Sacks and Sacks, LLP, New York (Scott N. Singer of counsel), for ap — O’Connor, O’Connor, Hintz & Deveney, LLP, Melville (Brian T. Deveney of counsel), for respondentsap — Litchfield Cavo LLP, New York (Michael K. Dvorkin of counsel), for res — Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Julia I. Rodriguez, J.), entered April 10, 2012, which, to the extent appealed from, denied plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of defendants Gilbane/TDX Joint Venture, Gilbane Inc., and TDX Construction Corp.’s (the Gilbane/TDX defendants) liability under Labor Law §240(1), granted, in part, the Gilbane/TDX defendants’ cross motion for summary judgment dismissing plaintiffs complaint on the ground that the Gilbane/TDX defendants, as the construction manager, did not supervise, direct or control the plaintiff’s work, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The IAS court correctly determined that the Gilbane/TDX defendants, as the construction manager, were not liable under the Labor Law for plaintiff’s injuries, as the Gilbane/TDX defendants did not direct, control or supervise plaintiff’s work. There is nothing in the record to indicate that the Gilbane/TDX defendants were other than the typical construction manager and therefore not the agent of the Dormitory Authority of New York, the owner of the building being built at the time of injury (see e.g. Walls v. Turner Constr. Co., 4 NY3d 861 [2005]).

JOHN RODRIGUEZ, plf-ap, v. GILBANE/TDX JOINT VENTURE Defendants-res-ap, GILBANE, INC., def

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to New York Law Journal