Opinion
13036 Index No. 162126/14 Case No. 2020-03341
02-04-2021
George MILLLIGAN, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. TUTOR PERINI CORPORATION et al., Defendants–Respondents. [And a Third-Party Action]
The Feld Law Firm P.C., Harrison (David L. Feld of counsel), for appellant. Lawrence, Worden, Rainis & Bard, P.C., Melville (Michael E. Shay of counsel), for respondents.
The Feld Law Firm P.C., Harrison (David L. Feld of counsel), for appellant.
Lawrence, Worden, Rainis & Bard, P.C., Melville (Michael E. Shay of counsel), for respondents.
Kapnick, J.P., Mazzarelli, Moulton, Shulman, JJ.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Debra A. James, J.), entered May 14, 2020, which, to the extent appealed from, denied plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability on his Labor Law § 240(1) claim, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and plaintiff's motion granted.
Plaintiff testified that he was injured when he fell while using a wet and slippery wooden ladder provided by defendants for him to move between the tenth and eleventh floors of the construction site to perform his work. This testimony established prima facie that plaintiff's work exposed him to an elevation-related risk against which defendants failed to provide him with proper protection, as required by Labor Law § 240(1) (see e.g. Pierrakeas v. 137 E. 38th St. LLC, 177 A.D.3d 574, 114 N.Y.S.3d 318 [1st Dept. 2019] ). It is clear that the ladder was not adequate to prevent plaintiff from falling and there is no dispute that other than the ladder, no additional safety devices were provided (see Hill v. City of New York, 140 A.D.3d 568, 35 N.Y.S.3d 307 [1st Dept. 2016] ). Plaintiff was not required to show that the ladder was inherently defective (see McCarthy v. Turner Constr., Inc., 52 A.D.3d 333, 859 N.Y.S.2d 648 [1st Dept. 2008] ).
In opposition, defendants failed to raise a triable issue of fact. Although plaintiff was the only witness to his accident, nothing in the record controverts his account of the accident or calls his credibility into question (see Ortiz v. Burke Ave. Realty, Inc., 126 A.D.3d 577, 578, 3 N.Y.S.3d 582 [1st Dept. 2015] ).