Temes v. Columbus Centre LLC
Decision Date | 14 February 2008 |
Docket Number | 2734. |
Citation | 2008 NY Slip Op 01399,851 N.Y.S.2d 188,48 A.D.3d 281 |
Parties | BARRY TEMES et al., Appellants, v. COLUMBUS CENTRE LLC et al., Respondents. |
Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Plaintiff Barry Temes, while working for a contractor in a newly constructed building, allegedly slipped on a patch of ice covered by construction dirt and wrenched his hip. He testified that at the time of the accident, he was returning to his work area from the men's room located on another level, and was walking across a "big, open area" of the basement. On these facts, the claim for alleged violation of Labor Law § 200 and common-law negligence was correctly dismissed in the absence of any evidence that defendants had actual or constructive notice of the particular icy condition where the accident took place. However, the claim under Labor Law § 241 (6) should be reinstated. The accident occurred on a "floor" within the meaning of 12 NYCRR 23-1.7 (d), the provision of the Industrial Code concerning slipping hazards, and the evidence that plaintiff slipped on a patch of ice obscured by construction debris raises a triable issue as to whether "someone within the chain of the construction project was negligent in not exercising reasonable care, or acting within a reasonable time, to prevent or remediate the hazard" (Rizzuto v L.A. Wenger Contr. Co., 91 NY2d 343, 351 [1998]).
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Velasquez v. 795 Columbus LLC
...672 N.E.2d 605 [1996] ). Plaintiff was working on a “floor” within the meaning of 12 NYCRR 23–1.7(d) ( see Temes v. Columbus Ctr. LLC, 48 A.D.3d 281, 851 N.Y.S.2d 188 [1st Dept. 2008] ); the floor became covered with mud and water due to a water main break and rain. As the mud was not part ......
-
Ocampo v. Bovis Lend Lease LMB, Inc.
...(see Booth v. Seven World Trade Co., L.P., 82 A.D.3d 499, 500–501, 918 N.Y.S.2d 428 [1st Dept.2011] ; Temes v. Columbus Ctr. LLC, 48 A.D.3d 281, 851 N.Y.S.2d 188 [1st Dept.2008] ). Contrary to defendant's argument, the ice was not integral to the work (cf. O'Sullivan v. IDI Constr. Co., Inc......
-
Booth v. Seven World Trade Co., L.P.
...the hazard" ( Rizzuto v. LA Wenger Contr. Co., 91 N.Y.2d 343, 351, 670 N.Y.S.2d 816, 693 N.E.2d 1068 [1998]; Temes v. Columbus Ctr. LLC, 48 A.D.3d 281, 851 N.Y.S.2d 188 [2008] ). Plaintiff testified that he arrived on site two hours prior to his accident, and spent the first hour and a half......
-
Alvarado v. S.C. 142 W. 24, LLC
... ... that he was permitted to work on a slippery floor. See ... Velasquez v. 795 Columbus LLC, 103 A.D.3d 541 ... (1stDep't 2013); Temes v. Columbus Centre ... LLC, 48 A.D.3d ... ...