In D* v J.*. Inc., the Appellate Division, First Department, reinforced the protective scope of New York Labor Law § 240(1), commonly known as the “Scaffold Law.” The case arose from a workplace accident in which plaintiff TD, an electrician, fell from an A-frame ladder while performing overhead ceiling wiring at a Manhattan job site.
D* testified that while using both hands to handle a ceiling tile, the tile unexpectedly dropped, causing the ladder to “wiggle” and leading to his fall. He had no nearby structure to grab for support. Although the ladder appeared to be in good condition before use, the court emphasized that under § 240(1), a worker need not prove a defect in the equipment—only that it failed to provide adequate protection against a gravity-related hazard.
The New York County Supreme Court had initially granted summary judgment to the defendants, including the property owner and general contractor, dismissing D*’s claim. However, the Appellate Division reversed that decision, holding that D* had established a prima facie case for liability under § 240(1). The court cited precedent affirming that even a properly inspected ladder can be deemed inadequate if it fails to prevent a fall during the performance of elevation-related work.
Defendants’ argument—that D*’s fall was due to his own misstep or that the ladder only moved after he lost balance—was rejected. The court found that the fall was directly related to the work being performed and that the ladder’s failure to stabilize him rendered it an insufficient safety device.
This ruling underscores the strict liability nature of Labor Law § 240(1) and serves as a reminder to contractors and property owners of their non-delegable duty to provide workers with proper fall protection. It also reinforces that courts will scrutinize the adequacy of safety devices based on their performance in real-world conditions, not merely their appearance or inspection history.
Defying gravity wasn't in that guy's job description? (How wicked.)
# # #
DECISION