New York, New York (PRWEB) October 22, 2013
Parker Waichman LLP, a national law firm dedicated to protecting the rights of workers who get injured in accidents on construction sites, notes that the Supreme Court of the State of New York has ruled in favor of a liability issue of a Plaintiff’s summary judgment to recover damages sustained from a fall through an unprotected opening in a floor while working as a plumber’s apprentice on a construction site (Perez, Richard v. Al-Stone LLC, Case No. 015143, filed on March 12, 2010, at the Supreme Court of the State of New York). The court’s decision was handed down in a memorandum filed on Oct. 21, 2013. Specifically, according to court documents, it was ordered that the Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment on the liability issue of his Labor Law § 240 (1) claim against Al-Stone LLC, Tritel Construction Group LLC and Broadway Wallboard Inc. be granted.
According to court documents, the accident occurred on June 2, 2009, during construction of a new Double Tree hotel at 8 Stone Street in New York. The building under construction was owned by Al-Stone LLC. Al-Stone had hired Tritel Construction Group Downtown LLC d/b/a Tritel Construction Group LLC to serve as the general contractor and CNY Builders LLC to serve as construction manager. CNY, in turn, hired a number of additional contractors, including plumbing contractor Bass Plumbing & Heating Corp., carpentry contractor (responsible for the protection of floor opening and holes) Broadway Wallboard Inc., and HVAC subcontractor Matrix Mechanical Corp. Providing site safety management services was Safety and Quality Plus Inc. Bass was Plaintiff Perez’s employer.
Court documents noted that the Plaintiff had testified that, at the time of the accident, he and a coworker were installing a pipe on the ninth floor of the building. After finishing, the coworker asked the Plaintiff to step back to see if the pipe was straight. As he stepped backward, the Plaintiff fell partially into a rectangular opening in the floor, falling through to just below his hips, including part of his right foot. The Plaintiff was further injured when he attempted to stop his fall by grabbing onto a metal stud with his right hand, which injured the tendons and nerves on four of his fingers on that hand.
The Plaintiff testified that the opening, which went through to the eighth floor below, had not been protected by any type of covering or barricade, court documents added. The Plaintiff also testified that he estimated the opening to be 1 foot by 2 feet in size and said that he was not aware of it prior to his accident. He had also observed that a piece of plywood, larger than the opening, was on the floor to the right of the opening – not covering it. His coworker, during his own deposition, confirmed the Plaintiff’s version of events.
“This decision is a simple example of labor law doing what it is supposed to do: It shifts the burden to the ones most capable of protecting the workers at a construction site – the owner of the property and the ones most in control of what is going on there,” said Raymond C. Silverman, a Partner at Parker Waichman LLP. “Labor Law § 240 (1) works; it is designed to provide exactly the kind of protection that it is providing.”
If you or a loved one have been injured in a construction accident, you may have valuable legal rights. To discuss your case with one of our lawyers who specializes in labor law, please view our Construction Accident Injury Lawsuit page or call 1-800-LAW-INFO (1-800-529-4636).
Parker Waichman LLP
Gary P. Falkowitz, Managing Attorney
1+ (800) LAW-INFO
1+ (800) 529-4636
Read the full story at http://www.prweb.com/releases/Perez_liability_claim/construction_accident/prweb11258351.htm.
Copyright©2012 Vocus, Inc.
All rights reserved