Citation Numbers: 15 A.D.3d 153, 789 N.Y.S.2d 120, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 812
Filed Date: 2/1/2005
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 11/1/2024
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Marilyn Shafer, J.), entered July 13, 2004, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, denied plaintiffs’ cross motion for summary judgment on their Labor Law § 240 (1) claim and granted that part of the motion by third-party defendant and the cross motion by defendant to dismiss plaintiffs’ Labor Law § 241 (6) claim, unanimously modified, on the law, that part of third-party defendant’s motion and defendant’s cross motion seeking summary dismissal of the cause of action based on section 240 (1) granted, and otherwise affirmed, without costs. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment dismissing the complaint in its entirety.
A “motion for summary judgment, irrespective of by whom it is made, empowers a court, even on appeal, to search the record
The court properly granted that portion of third-party defendant’s motion and defendant’s cross motion directed to the section 241 (6) claim. Plaintiffs reliance on Industrial Code (12 NYCRR) § 23-1.7 (d) is misplaced, since there was no evidence of a slippery condition (see D’Acunti v New York City School Constr. Auth., 300 AD2d 107 [2002]). Concur — Andrias, J.E, Nardelli, Gonzalez and Sweeny, JJ.