Cardile v. D'Ambrosia
| Decision Date | 09 October 1979 |
| Citation | 72 A.D.2d 544,420 N.Y.S.2d 732 |
| Parties | Frank CARDILE et al., Appellants, v. Joseph D'AMBROSIA et al., Defendants, Third-Party Plaintiffs-Respondents, M.E.C. Transmission, Inc., Second Third-Party Defendant-Respondent. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Henry Stanziale, Brooklyn, for appellants.
Martin K. Kahn, Brooklyn, for defendants third-party plaintiffs-respondents.
Benjamin M. Haber, New York City, for second third-party defendant-respondent.
Before MOLLEN, P. J., and HOPKINS, DAMIANI and TITONE, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., plaintiffs appeal from (1) a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered June 21, 1978, which, Inter alia, is in favor of the defendants upon a jury verdict, and (2) an order of the same court, entered April 14, 1978, which denied their motion, Inter alia, to set aside the verdict and for a directed verdict in their favor.
Judgment modified and order reversed, on the law, motion granted to the extent that the verdict in favor of defendants and against plaintiffs is set aside and a verdict is directed in favor of plaintiffs and against the defendants; the first and third decretal paragraphs are deleted from the judgment, and plaintiffs are granted an interlocutory judgment in their favor as against the defendants on the issue of liability. As so modified, judgment affirmed and the case is remitted to Trial Term for an assessment of damages. One bill of costs are awarded to plaintiffs and respondent M.E.C. Transmission, Inc. payable by defendants.
Plaintiff Frank Cardile was injured when he fell from a ladder while performing electrical work, as an independent contractor, for defendant Joseph D'Ambrosia, on premises owned by defendant Dean Realty Corp. Cardile, together with his wife who claims loss of consortium, commenced the instant action to recover for injuries sustained in the accident. The jury returned a verdict in favor of the defendants finding, in answers to interrogatories, that the ladder, which had been supplied by D'Ambrosia, was in no way defective, and that the accident resulted "solely because of the manner in which the work was being done."
Under section 240 of the Labor Law, judgment should have been directed in favor of the plaintiffs. While the jury did not credit Frank Cardile's testimony that the ladder itself was flawed, it clearly was of the belief that the ladder was not "placed and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kalofonos v. State
...work beyond the vertical supports near the rear edge of the planking did not afford him proper protection. (Cf. Cardile v. D'Ambrosia, 72 A.D.2d 544, 420 N.Y.S.2d 732.) Our conclusion of State liability under subdivision 1 is based on the factual finding that the mere two flat planks and ve......
-
Secord v. Willow Ridge Stables, Inc.
...give proper protection". Surely a ladder resting on uneven or unstable soil is not properly placed (see, for example, Cardile v. D'Ambrosia, 72 A.D.2d 544, 420 N.Y.S.2d 732 ["While the jury did not credit Frank Cardile's testimony that the ladder itself was flawed, it clearly was of the bel......
-
Kenny v. George A. Fuller Co.
...1 of section 240 of the Labor Law (see Pereira v. Herman Constr. Co., 74 A.D.2d 531, 425 N.Y.S.2d 308, supra; Cardile v. D'Ambrosia, 72 A.D.2d 544, 420 N.Y.S.2d 732), as it is undisputed that absolutely no safety measures were employed at the jobsite in order to protect the plaintiff from p......
-
Lagzdins v. United Welfare Fund-Security Division Marriott Corp.
...and that the inadequate bracing caused the collapse of the trusses. Just such a special verdict distinguishes Cardile v. D'Ambrosia, 72 A.D.2d 544, 420 N.Y.S.2d 732, a case upon which plaintiffs mistakenly rely for their right to a directed verdict. Contributory negligence of the plaintiffs......