ALEKSEY PODOBEDOV, APPELLANT- res, v. EAST COAST CONSTRUCTION GROUP, INC., ETC. DEFENDANTS THIRD-PARTY PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS- ap; IBK ENTERPRISES, INC., ETC., THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANT-res- res

ALEKSEY PODOBEDOV, APPELLANT- res, v. EAST COAST CONSTRUCTION GROUP, INC., ETC. DEFENDANTS THIRD-PARTY PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS- ap; IBK ENTERPRISES, INC., ETC., THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANT-res- res — (INDEX NO. 25048/06)In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Schack, J.), dated April 1, 2013, as denied his motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability on the cause of action alleging a violation of Labor Law §240(1), the defendants third-party plaintiffs cross-appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of the same order as denied their cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint or, in the alternative, for summary judgment on the issue of contractual indemnification, and the third-party defendant cross-appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of the same order as, in effect, denied its cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and the third-party complaint.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

ALEKSEY PODOBEDOV, APPELLANT- res, v. EAST COAST CONSTRUCTION GROUP, INC., ETC. DEFENDANTS THIRD-PARTY PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS- ap; IBK ENTERPRISES, INC., ETC., THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANT-res- res — (INDEX NO. 25048/06)In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Schack, J.), dated April 1, 2013, as denied his motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability on the cause of action alleging a violation of Labor Law §240(1), the defendants third-party plaintiffs cross-appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of the same order as denied their cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint or, in the alternative, for summary judgment on the issue of contractual indemnification, and the third-party defendant cross-appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of the same order as, in effect, denied its cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and the third-party complaint.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

ALEKSEY PODOBEDOV, APPELLANT- res, v. EAST COAST CONSTRUCTION GROUP, INC., ETC. DEFENDANTS THIRD-PARTY PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS- ap; IBK ENTERPRISES, INC., ETC., THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANT-res- res

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to New York Law Journal