discussed Cited as authority (rule) Didas v. Rochester Gas & Elec. Corp. In addition, we conclude that the court properly granted plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment on the Labor Law § 240 (1) cause of action inasmuch as plaintiff met his initial burden on the motion and defendant failed to raise a triable issue of fact in opposition thereto ( see generally Flowers v Harborcenter Dev., LLC , 155 AD3d 1633, 1634-1635 [4th Dept 2017]; Luna , 101 AD3d at 1745-1746).

discussed Cited "see" THOMPSON, WILLIAM R. v. SITHE/INDEPENDENCE LLC (2×) Auth., 275 AD2d 911, 912 [2000]; see Luna v Zoological Socy. of Buffalo, Inc., 101 AD3d 1745 , 1746 [2012]).

discussed Cited "see, e.g." Fazekas v. Time Warner Cable, Inc. It is well settled that the failure to follow an instruction by an employer or owner to avoid unsafe practices does not consti tute a refusal to use available, safe and appropriate equipment, and we therefore agree with plaintiffs that plaintiff’s failure to follow the owner’s instructions and advice does not preclude defendant’s liability under Labor Law § 240 (1) (see Miles v Great Lakes Cheese of N.Y., Inc., 103 AD3d 1165 , 1167 [2013]; see also Luna v Zoological Socy. of Buffalo, Inc., 101 AD3d 1745 , 1746 [2012]; see generally Gordon, 82 NY2d at 563 ).

discussed Cited "see, e.g." Fazekas v. Time Warner Cable, Inc. It is well settled that the failure to follow an instruction by an employer or owner to avoid unsafe practices does not consti tute a refusal to use available, safe and appropriate equipment, and we therefore agree with plaintiffs that plaintiff’s failure to follow the owner’s instructions and advice does not preclude defendant’s liability under Labor Law § 240 (1) (see Miles v Great Lakes Cheese of N.Y., Inc., 103 AD3d 1165 , 1167 [2013]; see also Luna v Zoological Socy. of Buffalo, Inc., 101 AD3d 1745 , 1746 [2012]; see generally Gordon, 82 NY2d at 563 ).

discussed Cited "see, e.g." FAZEKAS, WILLIAM J. v. TIME WARNER CABLE, INC. It is well settled that the failure to follow an instruction by an employer or owner to avoid unsafe practices does not constitute a refusal to use available, safe and appropriate equipment, and we therefore agree with plaintiffs that plaintiff’s failure to follow the owner’s instructions and advice does not preclude defendant’s liability under Labor Law § 240 (1) (see Miles v Great Lakes Cheese of N.Y., Inc., 103 AD3d 1165 , 1167; see also Luna v Zoological Socy. of Buffalo, Inc., 101 AD3d 1745 , 1746; see generally Gordon, 82 NY2d at 563 ).