DaSilva v. Haks Eng'rs, Architects & Land Surveyors, P.C.

• Decision Date: 17 February 2015
• Citation: 2015 N.Y. Slip Op. 01380,125 A.D.3d 480,4 N.Y.S.3d 162
• Parties: Paulo DaSILVA, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. HAKS ENGINEERS, ARCHITECTS AND LAND SURVEYORS, P.C., et al., Defendants–Respondents.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

125 A.D.3d 480
4 N.Y.S.3d 162
2015 N.Y. Slip Op. 01380

Paulo DaSILVA, Plaintiff–Appellant
v.
HAKS ENGINEERS, ARCHITECTS AND LAND SURVEYORS, P.C., et al., Defendants–Respondents.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Feb. 17, 2015.

4 N.Y.S.3d 163

Davidson & Cohen, P.C., Rockville Center (Robin Mary Heaney of counsel), for appellant.

Law Office of Charles J. Seigel, New York (Reed M. Podell of counsel), for Haks Engineers, Architects and Land Surveyors, P.C., respondent.

Colleran, O'Hara & Mills L.L.P., Woodbury (Michael D. Bosso of counsel), for Earth Tech Northeast, Inc. and Haks Et Joint Venture, respondents.

GONZALEZ, P.J., FRIEDMAN, ANDRIAS, GISCHE, KAPNICK, JJ.

Opinion

125 A.D.3d 480

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Donna M. Mills, J.), entered October 8, 2013, which granted defendants' motions for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

In this action alleging violations of Labor Law §§ 200, 240(1) and 241(6), plaintiff, a construction worker employed by nonparty Yonkers Contracting, Inc., was injured when, while working on the construction of the Croton Falls Dam, a project undertaken by nonparty Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), the plank of the scaffold he was standing on shifted, causing him to fall to the concrete below. DEP had entered into a construction management services contract (CMS) with defendant Haks Et Joint Venture which constituted of co-defendants Earth Tech Northeast, Inc. and Haks Engineers, Architects and Land Surveyors, P.C. pursuant to which defendants had project management responsibilities which included providing a resident engineer and making sure that construction contractors had necessary permits and maintained their records in accordance

125 A.D.3d 481

with standard practice. The construction manager was also responsible for reviewing the health and safety plans of contractors, as well as “develop[ing] and implement[ing] an overall Health and Safety Plan addressing activities associated with existing on-site conditions.” However, the CMS specified that “[t]he [construction manager] will not supervise, direct, control or have authority over or be responsible for each contractor's means, methods, techniques, sequences or procedures of construction or the safety precautions and programs incident thereto. If it became apparent that the means and methods of construction...