Second Department reverses summary judgment for Toll Brothers developer: general contractor failed to eliminate triable issues of fact as to whether it had supervisory authority over concrete delivery operations — that question must go to trial.
Second Department reverses vacatur of arbitration award in construction subcontract dispute: arbitrator properly resolved the matter on written submissions after parties agreed to a paper-based process — skipping a scheduled conference call did not constitute a failure to hold a required hearing.
Second Department affirms denial of property owners’ motion to dismiss Labor Law § 240(1) and § 241(6) claims arising from worker’s elevation-related injury during renovation — Scaffold Law claims survive CPLR 3211 and must be addressed through discovery.
Second Department affirms $1.46 million bench trial judgment for contractor: project owner caused the delays, liquidated damages clause was unenforceable, and contractor properly foreclosed mechanic’s lien.
The First Department affirms summary judgment for a stone mechanic struck by a 350-pound falling panel, holding that all four defendants — including a post-merger associate, a lobby condominium, and a building manager who contracted for the work — qualify as owners or statutory agents under Labor Law § 240(1).
Second Department affirms duty to defend general contractor as additional insured where injured worker’s deposition in the underlying action established he was using the subcontractor’s ladder — applying the four corners rule’s exception for formal litigation submissions.
Second Department reverses § 240(1) summary judgment where worker struck by unknown object from upper scaffold: plaintiff must identify the object and show it was being hoisted or required securing.
Second Department affirms Labor Law § 240(1) liability where worker was directed to climb a seven-foot stack of doors without a ladder, and upholds CPLR 3126 preclusion of an undisclosed defense witness.
In the companion appeal to the WDF v. Pegno construction dispute over a Newtown Creek project liquidating agreement, the Appellate Division, Second Department affirms denial of summary judgment to the joint venture defendants on their release defense, holding that the release clause is ambiguous as to claims arising from the post-execution City settlement.
In companion decisions on cross-appeals, the Appellate Division, Second Department holds that the release clause in a construction subcontract liquidating agreement is ambiguous as to whether it bars claims arising from the joint venture’s post-execution settlement with the City of New York—leaving the scope of the release and the parties’ cooperation obligations for trial.
The North Carolina Court of Appeals held that a mechanic’s lien with incorrect (not merely omitted) dates of first and last furnishing is fatally defective under N.C.G.S. § 44A-12, regardless of actual prejudice, and that the cash bond posted to discharge the defective lien must be returned to the property owner even though the contractor prevailed on its breach-of-contract claim at trial.
The Ninth Circuit holds that California’s 10-year construction statute of repose (CCP § 337.15) cannot be extended by equitable tolling to correct a misnamed party, but can be harmonized with CCP § 474’s Doe-substitution mechanism — allowing plaintiffs who timely named unknown contractor
The Appellate Division, First Department affirmed denial of a construction worker’s partial summary judgment on Labor Law §§ 240(1) and 241(6) Scaffold Law claims, finding the foreman’s testimony that plaintiff was instructed to use a scissor lift — not a ladder — created a triable recalcitrant-worker defense.
The First Department affirmed summary judgment dismissing a contractor’s mechanic’s lien foreclosure claim under New York’s Lien Law willful exaggeration defense after the contractor admitted including over $1 million for work never performed, but denied summary judgment on the owner’s conditions-precedent defense because the parties’ course of conduct raised factual issues about whether notice requirements were waived.
California’s Fourth Appellate District held that California’s absolute litigation privilege bars a property owner from suing an opposing construction expert for negligence in formulating repair recommendations contained in a litigation expert report, even after those repairs failed.
The Appellate Division, Second Department reversed a plaintiff’s Labor Law § 240(1) summary judgment after defendants raised a triable issue of fact on the sole-proximate-cause defense, showing that a six-foot ladder was available but that the carpenter chose to use scissor clamps on a cement column instead.
First Department affirms Labor Law § 240(1) summary judgment for a plumber injured when an extension ladder slid, holding that trips to retrieve materials for ongoing work constitute protected ancillary activity under the Scaffold Law.
First Department reinstates a Labor Law § 241(6) claim for a worker who tripped on a floor inlay in a corridor after finding genuine fact issues on whether the space was a ‘passageway’ under the Industrial Code, and holds the integral-to-work doctrine inapplicable absent evidence of active work on the hazard.
The Appellate Division, Second Department affirms confirmation of a $1.09 million FAA arbitration award in favor of a concrete subcontractor wrongfully terminated during the COVID-19 construction shutdown, rejecting the general contractor’s argument that the panel’s ruling manifestly disregarded the law.
The Appellate Division, Second Department affirms denial of summary judgment on a Labor Law § 240(1) Scaffold Law claim where conflicting testimony created a triable issue of fact as to whether a worker was struck by a suspended load moving under the force of gravity when a backhoe’s tire entered a depression in the roadway.
The Seventh Court of Appeals affirmed no-evidence summary judgment against homebuyers who contracted for a $600,000 custom home, holding that their failure to respond to the builder’s evidentiary objections in the trial court forfeited those challenges on appeal under the preservation rule — leaving them without sufficient evidence to withstand summary judgment on any claim.
The First Department upheld Labor Law §241(6) and §200 liability arising from a Bronx building floor collapse caused by stored-material overloading, and modified the order to award full contractual indemnification against the general contractor.
The First Department reversed summary discharge of a mechanic’s lien, holding that Lien Law § 19(6) authorizes discharge only for facial defects in the notice of lien—substantive validity challenges belong in a foreclosure action, not a summary discharge proceeding.
First Department partially reinstates Labor Law Section 241(6) claim in construction debris case, finding stairwell was both passageway and work area and debris not integral to work.