CUNNINGHAM, III, EDWARD v. LECHASE CONSTRUCTION ( 2011 )


Menu:
  •         SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
    Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
    1078
    CA 11-00958
    PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., SMITH, CENTRA, GREEN, AND GORSKI, JJ.
    EDWARD CUNNINGHAM, III, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
    V                                               ORDER
    LECHASE CONSTRUCTION, FREDERICO
    WRECKING CO., INC., AND FRIENDS OF FINGER
    LAKES PERFORMING ARTS CENTER, INC.,
    DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS.
    --------------------------------------------
    FREDERICO WRECKING CO., INC., THIRD-PARTY
    PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
    V
    CONTOUR ERECTION AND SIDING SYSTEMS, INC.,
    THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.
    --------------------------------------------
    LECHASE CONSTRUCTION SERVICES, LLC AND
    FRIENDS OF FINGER LAKES PERFORMING ARTS
    CENTER, INC., THIRD-PARTY
    PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS,
    V
    CONTOUR ERECTION AND SIDING SYSTEMS, INC.,
    THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.
    MAXWELL MURPHY, LLC, BUFFALO (ALAN D. VOOS OF COUNSEL), FOR
    PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT.
    BROWN & TARANTINO, LLC, BUFFALO (ANN M. CAMPBELL OF COUNSEL), FOR
    DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS AND THIRD-PARTY PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS.
    MACKENZIE HUGHES LLP, SYRACUSE (JENNIFER P. WILLIAMS OF COUNSEL), FOR
    THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.
    Appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Erie County (John A.
    Michalek, J.), entered November 24, 2010 in a personal injury action.
    The order, inter alia, denied the motion of plaintiff for partial
    summary judgment on liability pursuant to Labor Law § 240 (1), granted
    those parts of the motions of defendants-third-party plaintiffs and
    third-party defendant seeking summary judgment dismissing the
    complaint, and granted that part of the motion of third-party
    defendant seeking summary judgment dismissing the third-party
    -2-                          1078
    CA 11-00958
    complaints.
    It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is
    unanimously modified on the law by denying those parts of the motions
    of defendants-third-party plaintiffs and third-party defendant seeking
    summary judgment dismissing the Labor Law § 240 (1) claim and the
    Labor Law § 241 (6) claim to the extent that it is premised on a
    violation of 12 NYCRR 23-3.3 (h), reinstating those claims and denying
    that part of the motion of third-party defendant seeking summary
    judgment dismissing the third-party complaints and reinstating the
    third-party complaints, and as modified the order is affirmed without
    costs (see Charney v LeChase Constr., ___ AD3d ___ [Dec. 23, 2011]).
    Entered:   December 23, 2011                    Frances E. Cafarell
    Clerk of the Court
    

Document Info

Docket Number: CA 11-00958

Filed Date: 12/23/2011

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 10/8/2016