Practice point: Not every fall from a ladder establishes that the ladder did not provide proper protection Here, the plaintiffs' own submissions demonstrated triable issues of fact as to how the injured plaintiff's
accident occurred, including whether he fell because he merely lost his
balance. In any event, the defendants and the third-party defendant
demonstrated that the plaintiffs' motion was premature, as further
discovery may lead to relevant evidence, pursuant to CPLR 3212[f].
The Appellate Division found that the Supreme Court properly denied the plaintiffs'
motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability on the cause of
action alleging a violation of Labor Law § 240(1) insofar as asserted
against the defendant-school district, without
prejudice to renew after discovery.
Student note: In order to establish liability under § 240(1), there must
be a violation of the statute, and the violation must be a proximate
cause of the plaintiff's injury.
Case: Degen v. Uniondale Union Free Sch. Dist., NY Slip Op 01146 (2d Dept. 2014).
Here is the decision.
Tomorrow's issue: An easement by necessity.
