September 5, 2012
Labor Law.
Practice point: The engineer's contractual duty to visit the site "at periodic intervals" to determine if construction was in accordance with plans and specifications, is insufficient by itself to hold the engineer liable under Labor Law § 240(1) and § 241(6), and there is no evidence otherwise to indicate that the engineer had the authority to direct or control the work at issue.
Student note: Since the defective condition was latent and not visibly apparent, the fact that the owners were frequently present at the accident site, even for prolonged periods of time, is insufficient to establish constructive notice.
Case: Lopez v. Dagan, NY Slip Op 05999 (1st Dept. 2012).
Here is the decision.
Tomorrow’s issue: The work product privilege.