HECTOR CUENTAS, plfres, v. SEPHORA USA, INC. def-ap

8379. HECTOR CUENTAS, plfres, v. SEPHORA USA, INC. def-ap — [AND ANOTHER ACTION] Biedermann Hoenig Semprevivo, New York (Edward O'Toole of counsel), for ap — Larry Dorman, P.C., Astoria (Michael S. Murphy of counsel), for res — Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Judith J. Gische, J.), entered September 15, 2011, which, insofar as appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability under Labor Law §240(1), unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

8379. HECTOR CUENTAS, plfres, v. SEPHORA USA, INC. def-ap — [AND ANOTHER ACTION] Biedermann Hoenig Semprevivo, New York (Edward O’Toole of counsel), for ap — Larry Dorman, P.C., Astoria (Michael S. Murphy of counsel), for res — Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Judith J. Gische, J.), entered September 15, 2011, which, insofar as appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability under Labor Law §240(1), unanimously affirmed, without costs.

In evaluating a claim under Labor Law §240(1), “the single decisive question is whether plaintiff’s injuries were the direct consequence of a failure to provide adequate protection against a risk arising from a physically significant elevation differential” (Runner v. New York Stock Exch., Inc., 13 NY3d 599, 603 [2009]). “It is well settled that failure to properly secure a ladder to insure that it remains steady and erect while being used constitutes a violation of Labor Law §240(1)” (Schultze v. 585 W. 214th St. Owners Corp., 228 AD2d 381, 381 [1st Dept 1996]). Plaintiff’s testimony that the ladder he was using was both unsteady as he was ascending it and too short to enable him to reach the window he was cleaning establishes prima facie that defendants failed to provide him with an adequate safety device under Labor Law §240(1) and that their failure proximately caused his injuries (see Orellano v. 29 E. 37th St. Realty Corp., 292 AD2d 289, 291 [1st Dept 2002]).

HECTOR CUENTAS, plfres, v. SEPHORA USA, INC. def-ap

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to New York Law Journal