New York High Court Issues Construction Accident Decision

February 23, 2012 (Press-News.org) Workers face many dangers on construction sites, including falls from heights and unsafe scaffolds or ladders. At any busy worksite, construction workers are also at risk of being struck by falling objects.

A recent New York Court of Appeals opinion, Wilinski v. 334 East 92nd Housing Development Fund, considered a worker's remedies for a Manhattan construction accident that occurred during demolition of a brick wall in a vacant warehouse. The worker suffered serious and lasting injuries when he was struck on the head, shoulder and arm by two ten-foot long, four-inch wide metal plumbing pipes that toppled onto him when hit by other falling debris.

The pipes stood upright from the floor upon which he was working, and the worker had expressed his concerns about the unsecured pipes to his supervisor earlier that day. His hard hat was knocked off when the first heavy pipe struck him, and he suffered several cuts, a concussion and neuropsychological injuries with the second blow.

He filed a construction injury lawsuit against the property developer under two provisions of New York's Labor Law that require contractors and property owners to furnish scaffolding, stays and other safety equipment to provide proper protection to workers involved in the demolition, erection, repair, alteration, painting or cleaning of buildings.

NYC Personal Injury Attorneys Assist Clients at Every Step of the Legal Process

The injured construction worker's lawyer moved for summary judgment before the Supreme Court on the part of his claim that cited New York's scaffold law. The trial judge granted the motion, holding that he had established as a matter of law that the defendant was liable for a failure to install proper safety devices that had caused a gravity-related injury. The court also affirmed that the worker would be able to argue that the developer had ignored its duty under a separate section of New York's Labor Law regarding construction, excavation and demolition worksite safety.

The developer appealed from the pretrial order, and an Appellate Division panel reversed the trial court, holding that falling plumbing pipes were not the type of elevation-related accident that the scaffold law was concerned with. The appellate justices also granted the defendant's pretrial motion to dismiss the scaffold law injury claim, but left the other claim intact.

Both parties further appealed to New York's highest court on the question of whether the Appellate Division had properly modified the original Supreme Court order.

Absolute Liability for Building Owners Who Fail to Provide Protection to Workers

In a split opinion, the Court of Appeals reversed the Appellate Division based on the lower court's erroneous interpretation of a 1995 case involving a mason who suffered severe injuries. That worker ultimately died from the wound caused when an unbraced fire wall collapsed on him while he was working at ground level.

The majority opinion reviewed a range of cases that had clarified the scope of the scaffold law, and held that those cases do not exclude claims for injuries caused by falling objects that are on the same level as the injury victim. The Court of Appeals emphasized that the important factor was whether there was a causal link between the lack of a safety device and the worker's injury.

The court noted that the pipes were not part of the demolition, and therefore no one on the site was expecting them to fall. The majority also pointed out that the top of the pipes fell at least four feet before striking the worker, who was less than six feet tall. However, the court concluded that, in this case, the causal connection had not been established and issues of fact made summary judgment inappropriate.

Dedicated Representation From Experienced Construction Accident Lawyers

This case underscores the diligence required to resolve some NYC construction accident cases. More than six years after he suffered injuries at the Manhattan construction site, the pretrial aspects of the worker's personal injury claim have finally been decided.

One important role of a workplace injury attorney is to recognize how resolution of pretrial issues on appeal can favor a client's prospects for a favorable settlement of litigation. Damages such as lost income, medical expenses and the lingering effects of traumatic brain injuries may require an injured worker to fight tooth and nail for a just outcome.

Article provided by Omrani & Taub, P.C.
Visit us at www.omraniandtaub.com