Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
9 New York opinions name it 4 courts 1961–2026 2 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by New York courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Ross v. Curtis-Palmer Hydro-Electric Co.green2 sentences2026Third, we have held that "general regulatory criteria" in the form of words like "adequate," "designated," "competent," "effective," "good," "proper," "safe," "sufficient," and "trained" "are not sufficient to give rise to a triable claim for damages under Labor Law § 241 (6)" ( Ross , 81 NY2d at 502; see Toussaint , 38 NY3d at 95; Gasques v State , 15 NY3d 869, 870 [2010]; Misicki , 12 NY3d at 520; Morris v Pavarini Const. , 9 NY3d 47, 50 [2007]). 2026Third, we have held that "general regulatory criteria" in the form of words like "adequate," "designated," "competent," "effective," "good," "proper," "safe," "sufficient," and "trained" "are not sufficient to give rise to a triable claim for damages under Labor Law § 241 (6)" ( Ross , 81 NY2d at 502 ; see Toussaint , 38 NY3d at 95; Gasques v State , 15 NY3d 869, 870 [2010]; Misicki , 12 NY3d at 520 ; Morris v Pavarini Const. , 9 NY3d 47, 50 [2007]). | 2 | 2 |
Misicki v. Caradonnagreen2 sentences2026Third, we have held that "general regulatory criteria" in the form of words like "adequate," "designated," "competent," "effective," "good," "proper," "safe," "sufficient," and "trained" "are not sufficient to give rise to a triable claim for damages under Labor Law § 241 (6)" ( Ross , 81 NY2d at 502; see Toussaint , 38 NY3d at 95; Gasques v State , 15 NY3d 869, 870 [2010]; Misicki , 12 NY3d at 520; Morris v Pavarini Const. , 9 NY3d 47, 50 [2007]). 2026Third, we have held that "general regulatory criteria" in the form of words like "adequate," "designated," "competent," "effective," "good," "proper," "safe," "sufficient," and "trained" "are not sufficient to give rise to a triable claim for damages under Labor Law § 241 (6)" ( Ross , 81 NY2d at 502 ; see Toussaint , 38 NY3d at 95; Gasques v State , 15 NY3d 869, 870 [2010]; Misicki , 12 NY3d at 520 ; Morris v Pavarini Const. , 9 NY3d 47, 50 [2007]). | 1 | 1 |
MATTER OF SEGRETO v. Grannisgreen2 sentences2026Third, we have held that "general regulatory criteria" in the form of words like "adequate," "designated," "competent," "effective," "good," "proper," "safe," "sufficient," and "trained" "are not sufficient to give rise to a triable claim for damages under Labor Law § 241 (6)" ( Ross , 81 NY2d at 502; see Toussaint , 38 NY3d at 95; Gasques v State , 15 NY3d 869, 870 [2010]; Misicki , 12 NY3d at 520; Morris v Pavarini Const. , 9 NY3d 47, 50 [2007]). 2026Third, we have held that "general regulatory criteria" in the form of words like "adequate," "designated," "competent," "effective," "good," "proper," "safe," "sufficient," and "trained" "are not sufficient to give rise to a triable claim for damages under Labor Law § 241 (6)" ( Ross , 81 NY2d at 502 ; see Toussaint , 38 NY3d at 95; Gasques v State , 15 NY3d 869, 870 [2010]; Misicki , 12 NY3d at 520 ; Morris v Pavarini Const. , 9 NY3d 47, 50 [2007]). | 1 | 1 |
Morris v. Pavarini Constructiongreen2 sentences2026Third, we have held that "general regulatory criteria" in the form of words like "adequate," "designated," "competent," "effective," "good," "proper," "safe," "sufficient," and "trained" "are not sufficient to give rise to a triable claim for damages under Labor Law § 241 (6)" ( Ross , 81 NY2d at 502; see Toussaint , 38 NY3d at 95; Gasques v State , 15 NY3d 869, 870 [2010]; Misicki , 12 NY3d at 520; Morris v Pavarini Const. , 9 NY3d 47, 50 [2007]). 2026Third, we have held that "general regulatory criteria" in the form of words like "adequate," "designated," "competent," "effective," "good," "proper," "safe," "sufficient," and "trained" "are not sufficient to give rise to a triable claim for damages under Labor Law § 241 (6)" ( Ross , 81 NY2d at 502 ; see Toussaint , 38 NY3d at 95; Gasques v State , 15 NY3d 869, 870 [2010]; Misicki , 12 NY3d at 520 ; Morris v Pavarini Const. , 9 NY3d 47, 50 [2007]). | 1 | 1 |
Kochman v. City of New Yorkgreen1 sentence2015Co., 81 NY2d 494, 502 [1993]) or are inapplicable to the facts of this case. “[S]ection 23-1.5 of the Industrial Code is too general to support a cause of action for violating Labor Law § 241 (6)” (Kochman v City of New York, 110 AD3d 477, 478 [1st Dept 2013]) and 12 NYCRR 23-6.1 (c) and (d) are inapplicable because his accident did not arise out of the operation or loading of “material hoisting equipment.” Even if we were to consider the affidavit stating that the equipment was being loaded onto the forklift at the time of the accident, subdivisions 23-6.1 (c) and (d) would still not apply be | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New York. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Salrex Investments, Inc. v. M. Slavin & Sons, Inc.
green
2 sentences2026Within the Appellate Division, First Department, production of the promissory note, together with proof of default, generally establishes a prima facie entitlement to judgment, shifting the burden to the debtor to come forward with evidentiary proof of a triable defense (Salrex, 214 AD2d at 399-400 ; Schaeffer, 214 AD3d at 424-425. 2026As the Appellate Division, First Department has stated, "where the documentary evidence conclusively indicates the existence of a loan, summary judgment will not be precluded based solely on the unsupported statement of the debtor" (Schaeffer, 214 AD3d at 424-425; quoting Salrex, 214 AD2d at 399-400 ). | 1 | 2026–2026 |
Cruz v. Banks
green
2 sentences2026Finally, as we have recently reiterated, "[a]dministrative regulations are generally subject to the same interpretive rules and canons of construction as statutes" ( Cruz v Banks , — NY3d — , 2026 NY Slip Op 00821 [2026]). 2026Finally, as we have recently reiterated, "[a]dministrative regulations are generally subject to the same interpretive rules and canons of construction as statutes" ( Cruz v Banks , — NY3d — , 2026 NY Slip Op 00821 [2026]). | 1 | 2026–2026 |
Howell v. Karl Koch Erecting Corp.
yellow
1 sentence2003(Howell v Koch Erecting Corp., 192 Misc 2d 491 [Sup Ct, Bronx County 2002].) There, the court made its determination based on the facts that (1) the provision contributes to overall safety of the work site, (2) it would prevent numerous crane injuries and (3) it cites the parts that must be inspected. | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Rizzuto v. L.A. Wenger Contracting Co.
green
1 sentence2002Co., 91 NY2d at 351 ). | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Chamberlain v. Town of Portville
neutral
1 sentence1996In light of plaintiffs failure to allege violations sufficient to support a triable claim for damages under Labor Law § 241 (6), Lupe Construction is also entitled to summary judgment as to plaintiffs Labor Law § 241 (6) claim (see, Chamberlain v Town of Portville, 177 AD2d 996, 997 , lv denied 80 NY2d 752 ). | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Simon v. Schenectady North Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses
green
1 sentence1994Co., supra, at 502; Simon v Schenectady N. Cong. of Jehovah’s Witnesses, 132 AD2d 313 ). | 1 | 1994–1994 |
In re Beneficial Finance Co. of New York, Inc.
green
1 sentence1970(Matter of Beneficial Finance Co. v. Skinner, 43 Misc 2d 546 .) CPLR 3212 entitled “ Motion for summary judgment,” provides, in part: “ (c) Triable issue of fact as to damages. | 1 | 1970–1970 |
Guzetta v. Carey
neutral
1 sentence1961(See Matter of Daly v. Wallace, 2 A D 2d 871 ; Matter of Pratt v. Lark, 7 A D 2d 869 ; Matter of Chiodo v. Rice, 9 A D 2d 688 ; Matter of Guzzetta v. Carey, 14 Misc 2d 235 , mod. on other grounds 7 A D 2d 920.) Triable issue of fact not having been duly raised the relief requested in the petition may be summarily granted. | 1 | 1961–1961 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.