green
Positive treatment
2.5 score
Treatment trajectory · 1998 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1998
2012
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
cited
Cited "see"
Trippi v. Main-Huron, LLC
Genesee School Dist., 307 AD2d 749 [2003]; see generally Weininger v Hagedorn & Co., 91 NY2d 958, 960 [1998], rearg denied 92 NY2d 875 [1998]; Manning v Johnson Bldg.
discussed
Cited "see"
Rounds v. Gibralter Steel Corp.
Plaintiff established as a matter of law that the lack of safety devices was a proximate cause of the accident, and thus the fact that he fell when the crowbar that he was using slipped and hit his face does not raise an issue of fact whether his actions were the sole proximate cause of the accident (see id.; see generally Weininger v Hagedorn & Co., 91 NY2d 958, 960 [1998], rearg denied 92 NY2d 875 [1998]).
cited
Cited "see"
Lang v. Chas. Mancuso & Son, Inc.
Co., 171 AD2d 292, 295 ; see Weininger v Hagedorn & Co., 91 NY2d 958, 959-960 , rearg denied 92 NY2d 875 ; Smith v Pergament Enters, of S.I., 271 AD2d 870, 871 ).
discussed
Cited "see"
Handley v. J.N. White associates, Inc.
In opposition, DGA and PMA merely speculated that plaintiff may have used his ladder improperly, and thus those defendants failed to raise an issue of fact whether the actions of plaintiff were the sole proximate cause of his accident (see, Sciolino v Village of Warsaw, 280 AD2d 920 ; Cricks v Niagara Mohawk Power Corp., 278 AD2d 813, 814 ; Evans v Anheuser-Busch, Inc., 277 AD2d 874 ; see generally, Weininger v Hagedom & Co., 91 NY2d 958 , rearg denied 92 NY2d 875 ), particularly in view of the fact that plaintiff had to place the ladder on an uneven surface.
discussed
Cited "see"
Brown v. BKV Realty Co.
Plaintiff submitted proof in admissible form establishing that his fall from a scaffold was the proximate cause of his injuries (see, Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324 ; see generally, Weininger v Hagedorn & Co., 91 NY2d 958, 960 , rearg denied 92 NY2d 875 ).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Manning v. Walter S. Johnson Building Co.
Defendant thus raised triable issues of fact whether the accident was caused by a defect in the scaffold (see Felker v Corning, Inc., 90 NY2d 219, 224 [1997]; Loveless v American Ref-Fuel Co. of Niagara, 299 AD2d 819 [2002]; Salotti v Wellco, Inc., 273 AD2d 862 [2000]; Madinya v Consolidated Edison Co. of N.Y., 202 AD2d 356 [1994]; see also Hilbert v Sahlen Packing Co., 267 AD2d 940, 941 [1999]) and whether the actions of plaintiff were the sole proximate cause of his injuries (see Weininger v Hagedorn & Co., 91 NY2d 958, 960 [1998], rearg denied 92 NY2d 875 [1998]; Salotti, 273 AD2d at 862-86…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Jeannette Yannitelli, Respondent, Et Al., Plaintiff,
v.
D. Yannitelli & Sons Construction Corp. Et Al., Defendants. Kenneth Heller, Appellant
v.
D. Yannitelli & Sons Construction Corp. Et Al., Defendants. Kenneth Heller, Appellant
New York Court of Appeals.
Jul 9, 1998.
700 N.E.2d 317
Published
Motion, insofar as it seeks leave to appeal from the order of Supreme Court entered October 3, 1996, dismissed upon the ground that it does not lie (see, NY Const, art VI, § 3 [b]; CPLR 5602); motion, insofar as it seeks leave to appeal from the Appellate Division order denying appellant’s motion for reargument or renewal or, in the alternative, leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals, dismissed upon the ground that that order does not finally determine the action within the meaning of the Constitution; motion for leave to appeal, etc., otherwise denied.