The following e-filed documents, listed by NYSCEF document number (Motion 003) 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 128 were read on this motion to/for SUMMARY JUDGMENT(AFTER JOINDER. The following e-filed documents, listed by NYSCEF document number (Motion 004) 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 129 were read on this motion to/for JUDGMENT — SUMMARY. DECISION + ORDER ON MOTION This is an action for personal injuries allegedly sustained by plaintiff Mikhail Khanunov (“plaintiff”) on May 15, 2018 while working as a sheet metal mechanic employed by non-party defendant AABCO Sheet Metal at a building located at 388-390 Greenwich Street, New York, NY on the 6th floor (the “Premises”). Plaintiff moves for partial summary judgment pursuant to Labor Law §§240 (1) and 241 (6) on liability (Motion Seq. No. 003).1 Defendants Citigroup Technology Inc., Tishman Construction Corporation (“Tishman”), Turner Construction Company (“Turner”) and ASM Mechanical Company, Inc. (collectively, “defendants”) move for summary judgment dismissing plaintiffs’ complaint in its entirety. By Interim Order, dated April 25, 2023 (NYSCEF Doc. No. 129), this Court denied plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment on plaintiff’s claims under Labor Law §241 (6) predicated on Industrial Code §§23-1.7 (e) (1) & (2) and 23-2.1 (a) (1) and granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing plaintiff’s claims under Labor Law §241 (6) predicated on Industrial Code §§23-1.7 (e) (1) & (2). Moreover, on the record this Court denied defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing plaintiff’s claims under Labor §241 (6) predicated on Industrial Code §23-2.1 (a) (1) (tr oral argument at 33-34). Defendants also move for summary judgment dismissing plaintiff’s claims under Labor Law §241 (6) predicated on Industrial Code §23-1.3. Given plaintiff has failed to submit any opposition thereto, plaintiff’s claim under Labor Law §241 (6) predicated on Industrial Code §23-1.3 is deemed abandoned.2 BACKGROUND Plaintiff’s Deposition Testimony On the day of the subject accident, plaintiff was working at the Premises which consisted of two connected buildings in Manhattan. The buildings were undergoing “repositioning”, that is, a refurbishing for the global headquarters of Citigroup (NYSCEF Doc. No. 75, 109 at 9 [Deposition of Kevin Louie, Sr. VP of Citi Realty Services/Senior VP of Citigroup ("Louie")]). There were multiple trades working on the sixth floor along with plaintiff and his partner (NYSCEF Doc. No. 73, 106 at 19-21 [Plaintiff Deposition]). Plaintiff was a sheet metal mechanic employed by AABCO Sheet Metal (“AABCO”) (id. at 9-10). From the start of the day of the accident up until the time the accident occurred, plaintiff was installing ductwork (id. at 22). Plaintiff testified that in the morning “we got the drawings, we got the safety meetings, we have to get [sic] the job site, open the gang box, take the tools, safety equipment and looking for material, get the drawings and prepare [sic] start to assemble pieces on the floor and get lifting materials and start doing installation of the ductwork of the ceiling or where they have to go” (id. at 16-17). Essentially, plaintiff alleges that on the day of the accident, he was engaged in assembling pieces of HVAC ducts that he was preparing to install in the ceiling, when a door leaning horizontally against the wall fell on him causing injuries. Plaintiff testified as follows: Q. What were you doing at the time of the incident? A. I was prepare [sic] to assemble pieces and looking for material (id. at 32). Q. When you were looking for material, what did you do as far as looking for material? A. Looking for material, our material should be in one pile and we start to, you know, in certain places and we have to find exactly the right pieces when they have to go according to drawings. Q. So had you put together any pieces of the HVAC before the accident occurred? A. I start collecting pieces. Q. And where were the pieces located? A. On the same floor (id. at 34). Q. So when you were collecting pieces, what were you doing as far as collecting pieces? Were you picking up pieces and bringing them to the location where you were going to assemble them? A. Yes, I find the right pieces with the number and I move them to the place where they have to go. Q. So when you were bringing them to the place where you have to go, were you installing pieces of the HVAC in the location where you were going to then install it above your head above the ceiling. A. Yeah, we leave it right on the floor. Q. Had you assembled any of the pieces before your accident occurred? A. Not yet, no. Q. Were you still bringing pieces to the location where you were going to assemble them? A. Yes. Q. And what happened as you were going to get a piece of HVAC? A. I found the right piece, I move the pieces, move it over and the door fell. Q. When you say you found the piece, could you describe the piece that you found? A. It’s a square piece approximately 58 or 60 inches long or tall. It’s [sic] all depends if they’re on the floor, it’s long, it it’s standing vertically and they [sic] installed. Q. Approximately how much did that piece weigh? A. I [sic] not remember. Q. Were you able to carry it and pick it up with your own power? A. Yes. (id. at 35-37). Q. So you were holding the piece of HVAC equipment at the time of the incident? A. Yes. Q. And the door that you mentioned that fell, where was the door located in relation to the location where the HVAC piece was located? A. Right behind the ductwork leading [sic] on the floor, on the wall. Q. Was there one or more than one door? A. More. Q. How many doors were there? A. Two. Q. And when you say the door was behind the ductwork, are you referring to the ductwork that you needed to assemble? A. Yes. Q. And how many pieces of ductwork were there by the door. A. It was a lot. Q. When you say a lot of pieces, how many pieces were there approximately? A. I cannot tell you (id. at 38-39). Q. Did you see the two doors by the ductwork before you picked up the piece of ductwork that you were taking to the location to assemble at the time of your accident? A. Yes. Q. Could you tell me the size of the doors that you saw? A. Exactly, no, I can only guess. Q. Could you estimate rather than guess? A. Um, 36 — eight by three foot. Q. Eight foot by three foot roughly? A. Roughly, yes (id. at 40-41). Q. And when you say they were leaning against the wall, were they leaning in a horizontal fashion or were they leaning in a vertical fashion the way a door would typically be positioned? A. Horizontal. Q. So they were about three feet up above the ground, the height? A. Yes. Q. And the two doors that were there, were they directly abutting each other leaning against the wall? A. Probably, yes. Q. In other words, there was one door and then another door was right next to it and they were both leaning together against the wall. A. Yes (id. at 41-42). Q. Did one or both doors fall? A. One (id. at 48). Q. So the door that fell, that was not the first door that was leaning against the wall, it was the door that was leaning against the door that was leaning against the wall? A. Yes. Q. Mr. Khanunov, the piece of HVAC that you were picking up at the time of the accident, had picked up, do you know if it was touching up against the door that fell? A. I am not sure. Q. Do you know how far the piece of HVAC may have been away from the door when you picked it up? A. It was close. Q. It was close, but you don’t know if it was touching the door? A. I’m not, I don’t know. Q. Do you know if there were other pieces of HVAC at that location that were touching up against the door. A. I don’t think so. Q. When the door fell, were you looking in the direction of the door or some other direction. A. Other direction. Q. So your body was turned away from the door at the time the door fell? A. Yes (id. at 49-50).3 Plaintiff testified that the door made contact with his knee and that his foot became stuck between the floor and the door (id. at 50-52). Depositions of Defendants Louie of Citigroup was in charge of the administrative aspects of the subject project. Louie testified that there were two construction managers on the project. Tishman performed the “core and shell positioning work” and Turner performed the “interior construction work” (NYSCEF Doc. No. 75 [Louie Deposition] at 11). In an Affidavit, sworn to on January 18, 2023 (NYSCEF Doc. No. 109), Louie attested that Citigroup did not have any direct control over the actual work being conducted since the two construction managers were hired to oversee and supervise the work (id., 3). Citigroup played no part in controlling the manner and method of the work being performed (id.). “On occasion, Citigroup, including myself, would perform ‘walk-throughs’ at the site while construction was taking place. However, there was no specific schedule of frequencies for these walk-throughs performed by Citigroup. The walk-throughs would only be done to be kept abreast of developments on the site and for determination as far as the extent of work being completed per scheduling” (id.). Louie did not have any first-hand knowledge of plaintiff’s accident, and only acquired knowledge through review of the incident report of the accident (id. at 4). Louie and Citigroup had no notice of the subject doors leaning on their side in the hallway of the 6th floor (id.). Frank Servidio (“Servidio”), a superintendent employed by Tishman, testified that the sixth floor was a “Tuner floor” (NYSCEF Doc. Nos. 78, 112 [Servidio Deposition] at 54). However, Servidio testified that he would walk through the subject site “periodically” meaning he would walk through on “certain occasions” to monitor work progress “mostly” (id. at 16-17). Greg Gutkes (“Gutkes”), a superintendent of Turner, testified that Turner oversaw work including work on the floor, interior walls, office spaces and conference rooms (NYSCEF Doc. Nos. 77, 110 [Gutkes Deposition] at 12). In an affidavit, sworn to on January 23, 2023 (NYSCEF Doc. No. 111), Gutkes attested that as one of the superintendents for Turner, Gutkes was assigned to oversee the work being performed on floors where Turner was the construction manager (id. at 2). Gutkes states that Turner did not perform any of the work but hired various subcontractors to do so (id.). Gutkes’ duties were to oversee the fit-out work performed by the various trades and ensure that the work was being timely completed and pursuant to job plans and specifications (id. at 4). Gutkes explained generally that doors were being installed as part of the project by various subcontractors and that the doors were delivered to the jobsite through the loading dock. The subcontractor who ordered the door, would take the door to the floor where it was to be utilized using the freight elevators and then the door would be off-loaded from the freight elevator to a corridor or hallway nearby (id. at
2, 3). The subject door would subsequently be brought to the location on that floor where they were to be utilized (id. at
