From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Alesse v. Valley Stream Central High School District #13

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 22, 1994
202 A.D.2d 326 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

Opinion

March 22, 1994

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Edward O'Brien, J.).


The trial court took judicial notice of Federal, State and local codes and regulations on which plaintiffs intended to rely (CPLR 4511), and properly determined that certain of them were not pertinent to the circumstances herein (see, Chanler v Manocherian, 151 A.D.2d 432, 433). The OSHA regulations were properly held inadmissable because they were enacted subsequent to the design and erection of the building, and also because plaintiff does not fall within the class of protected employees (see, Barzaghi v. Maislin Transp., 115 A.D.2d 679). Nor was it error to admit evidence of no prior accidents involving the doors in question since construction of the building in 1951 (De Salvo v. Stanley-Mark-Strand Corp., 281 N.Y. 333).

We have considered plaintiffs' other claims and find they do not warrant any modification of the judgment.

Concur — Rosenberger, J.P., Kupferman, Rubin and Williams, JJ.


Summaries of

Alesse v. Valley Stream Central High School District #13

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 22, 1994
202 A.D.2d 326 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
Case details for

Alesse v. Valley Stream Central High School District #13

Case Details

Full title:JOSEPH ALESSE et al., Respondents, v. VALLEY STREAM CENTRAL HIGH SCHOOL…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Mar 22, 1994

Citations

202 A.D.2d 326 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
609 N.Y.S.2d 217

Citing Cases

Schneir v. Food Parade, Inc.

There is nothing in the record to suggest that plaintiff was an employee of defendant Food Parade, Inc., thus…

People v. Wilson

Memorandum: Because the documents in the appendix to defendant's brief are dehors the record and do not come…