APPELLATE COURT RAMPS IT UP
After he fell down an unguarded ramp at a construction site, N.L., (and others), filed suit in New York County Supreme Court alleging that the conditions violated the state’s Labor Law – particularly Section 240(1) – which protects workers from elevation-related risks.
In this instance because the height differential from the top of the ramp to the ground was about 20 to 25 feet, both the Supreme Court, and the Appellate Division, First Department, were of the view that that triggered an obligation to provide “safety devices to prevent workers from inadvertently falling off it."
That the ramp was intended for the transport of materials, and was not a substitute for a ladder or scaffold, was of “no moment,” as the operative consideration was whether “the ramp covered a significant elevation differential,” and since it did so here, the AD1 agreed that, absent the appropriate protections, liability attached.
Looks like this case just got a bit more elevated …
# # #