19 results for 'cat:"Construction" AND cat:"Tort"'.
J. Belsome finds that the trial court should not have dismissed the property owner from a worker's claim related to injuries sustained when he suffered an electric shock and fell during his work on a construction site. In this case, there is a genuine issue of material fact that the property owner did not follow its own internal safety manual when it retained operational control of all electrical work and did not retain an electrical contractor to supervise all electrical work or to provide its own personnel. Reversed.
Court: Louisiana Court Of Appeal, Judge: Belsome, Filed On: May 15, 2024, Case #: 2023-CA-0749, Categories: construction, tort, Contract
Per curiam, the appellate division finds that the lower court properly granted the flooring subcontractors' motion to dismiss a personal injury suit because the worker's accident was not in connection with their work. The accident, caused when a scaffold wheel fell into an uncovered hole, occurred two weeks after the floor subcontractors left the job. Affirmed.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: May 2, 2024, Case #: 02364, Categories: construction, tort
Per curiam, the appellate division finds that the lower court improperly granted the man's motion for leave to file a late notice of claim against the city in a construction injury suit. The man's assertion that he did not learn the seriousness of his shoulder injury until months after the accident is not a reasonable excuse for his delay in serving a notice of claim, given that he filed a workers' compensation claim just weeks after the accident. Reversed.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: April 11, 2024, Case #: 01998, Categories: Civil Procedure, construction, tort
Per curiam, the appellate division finds that the lower court properly found for the transit agency in a construction injury suit. The agency did not control the means and methods of the drop-off procedures for workers at the Throgs Neck Bridge, which were left to the general contractor on the construction project. Affirmed.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: April 11, 2024, Case #: 02000, Categories: construction, tort
Per curiam, the appellate division finds that the lower court improperly found for the general contractor in a construction injury suit filed by a worker injured while working in an elevator shaft. The worker established that the 150-lb formwork panel that fell on him should have been, by law, secured by a safety device. However, negligence claims against the general contractor were correctly dismissed because the accident arose from the means of the work, which was direct controlled by the worker's employer. Reversed in part.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: March 26, 2024, Case #: 01671, Categories: construction, tort
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
Per curiam, the appellate division properly found for the property owner on a construction injury claim stemming from a worker's injury caused by a grinder. The worker did not fall from the ladder, even after he was struck in the face by the grinder, so the injury did not arise from any elevation-related risk. Rather, the evidence shows that the grinder did not have its guard attached, violating labor laws. Affirmed.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: March 21, 2024, Case #: 01607, Categories: construction, tort
Per curiam, the appellate division finds that the lower court improperly dismissed the third-party defendant's motion to dismiss labor law claims stemming from a worker's injury in an explosion while working on electrical lines from a aerial bucket of a truck. The construction firm failed to eliminate material issues of fact as to whether its negligence contributed to the accident.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: March 13, 2024, Case #: 01329, Categories: construction, tort
J. Manzanet-Daniels finds that the lower court improperly denied the construction worker's labor law claim stemming from an accident where he was struck in the head by a falling brick, which broke his hard hat. The worker is not required to show the exact circumstances under which the object fell. Further, it is undisputed there was no netting to prevent object from falling on workers. Reversed.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Manzanet-Daniels, Filed On: March 12, 2024, Case #: 01279, Categories: construction, tort, Labor
Per curiam, the appellate division finds that the lower court improperly refused to dismiss claims against a developer stemming from a construction injury. The evidence shows the worker's injuries took place within the scope of his employment, as his supervisor instructed him to act as a signalman instead of a crane operator, and his employer was responsible for providing safety equipment for the job. Reversed in part.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: February 13, 2024, Case #: 00750, Categories: construction, tort
Per curiam, the court of appeals denies the construction company's request for a writ of mandamus challenging the court's denial of its motion to compel the neuropsychological examination of the bicyclist who was injured from a crash precipitated by a drainage cover that gave way when he ran over it. The company waited more than four months to seek mandamus relief, did not address the delay or offer justification, and so has failed to act diligently to protect its rights. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: January 24, 2024, Case #: 12-24-00004-CV, Categories: construction, tort, Negligence
J. Rowe finds the trial court properly sustained the grocery store's challenge to evidence sufficiency in this negligence suit brought by a contractor who fell off a ladder supplied by the store when installing a new checkout lane. While a property owner has a duty to keep the premises reasonably safe for a contractor, there is an exception when the owner does not direct the work and the hazards resulting in injury are incidental to the work. The contractor has failed to establish that the owner owed him a duty of care. Affirmed.
Court: Oklahoma Supreme Court, Judge: Rowe , Filed On: September 26, 2023, Case #: 120434, Categories: construction, tort, Negligence
Per curiam, the appellate division finds that the lower court properly denied the construction firm's motion to dismiss a third-party complaint in a construction injury suit stemming from an unsecured gate blowing in the wind. Dismissal is inappropriate where the identity of the period who failed to secure the gate property is still unknown. Affirmed.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: September 26, 2023, Case #: 04743, Categories: construction, tort
J. Higgitt finds that the lower court improperly found for the construction firms in a suit stemming from a trench collapse that buried a construction worker underground. The worker was kneeling at the bottom of a six and a half-feet deep trench when the un-shored walls buckled and collapsed upon him. The firms are liable for the worker's injuries because the cave-in of an excavation qualifies as an elevation-related hazard, as it was a direct result of a significant elevation differential. Reversed.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Higgitt, Filed On: August 24, 2023, Case #: 04415, Categories: construction, tort
J. Block dismisses for lack of standing an action brought by three residents of East Hampton, New York, who sought to halt the construction of a wind farm off the coast of Long Island because the onshore trenching excavation work allegedly would exacerbate an existing PFAS contamination present in the surrounding soils. The defendants are not responsible for the onshore trenching work and are therefore are not the source of the residents’ alleged injury.
Court: USDC Eastern District of New York, Judge: Block, Filed On: July 17, 2023, Case #: 2:22cv1305, NOS: Administrative Procedure Act/Review or Appeal of Agency Decision - Other Suits, Categories: construction, Environment, tort
Per curiam, the appellate division finds that the lower court properly denied the port authority's motion to dismiss a worker's personal injury claims stemming from his fall while working on a construction project at the JFK International Airport. The port authority failed to conclusively show that the lubricated rebar on which the worker fell did not constitute a dangerous condition, or that it was an inherent risk of the worker's job. Affirmed.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: July 12, 2023, Case #: 03812, Categories: construction, tort
Per curiam, the appellate division finds that the lower court properly found for the city in a personal injury suit stemming from a worker's injury falling down stairs while working on a construction project at a school in Queens. The laws that protect workers from tripping hazards do not apply to his case, as the worker testified that he "slipped" on something sticky. Further, the jury reasonably found that the city lacked notice of the dangerous condition as the worker had gone up and down the same stairs numerous times without incident on the same day. Affirmed.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: July 12, 2023, Case #: 03769, Categories: construction, tort