Felix v. Indep. Sav. Bank, 89 A.D.3d 895 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011). · Go Syfert
Felix v. Indep. Sav. Bank, 89 A.D.3d 895 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
No syfertize treatment data for this case.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Joseph Felix
v.
Independence Savings Bank, and 20 Bayard Views, LLC, (And a Third-Party Action.)
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
Nov 15, 2011.
89 A.D.3d 895
Published

The plaintiff allegedly was injured when he fell from a scaffold, which was on wheels, while performing pipefitting work. He established, prima facie, that the defendants were subject to liability under Labor Law § 240 (1) based on his deposition testimony that a wheel of the scaffold on which he was working slipped into a hole, causing him to fall (see Caballero v Benjamin Beechwood, LLC, 67 AD3d 849, 852 [2009]).

[*896] In opposition, the defendants failed to raise a triable issue of fact (cf. Wiener v Rosmarin, 282 AD2d 449, 450 [2001]).

Accordingly, the Supreme Court should have granted the plaintiffs motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability on the cause of action alleging violations of Labor Law § 240 (1). Angiolillo, J.E, Leventhal, Austin and Roman, JJ., concur.