In a decision dated March 24, 2017, Justice Charles M. Troia granted summary judgment dismissing the plaintiff’s complaint and all cross-claims against our client, defendant CCA Civil, Inc., as a matter of law. Plaintiff, the operator of a motor vehicle, claims he was injured in a car accident in which the co-defendant rear ended his vehicle in a construction zone located on the Staten Island Expressway in Staten Island, New York. It is alleged that CCA was negligent in, among other things, the maintenance and protection of traffic on the subject roadway. In support of its summary judgment motion, CCA argued that it implemented, deployed and maintained the work zone traffic control plan in accordance with the State of New York’s plans, approvals and specifications as set forth in the contract between the State and CCA. It also argued that the plans and specifications upon which it relied and implemented were not so defective on their face that it was unreasonable for CCA to rely upon them. The evidence established that the work zone traffic control plan implemented by CCA at the time of the accident was proper for the location. Moreover, the testimony of the plaintiff and co-defendant established that the work zone traffic control plan did not create a dangerous condition and CCA’s work was not the proximate cause of the plaintiff’s accident. After oral argument on the motion, the Court granted CCA summary judgment because opposing counsel failed to raise any issue of fact that would have resulted in a denial of the motion.
Puccio v. John Denora et al., Index No. 101313/2014 (Richmond Co. Sup. Ct., Mar. 24, 2017)
In a decision dated February 21, 2017, Justice James E. d’Auguste granted summary judgment dismissing the third-party action for common law and contractual indemnification against our client, WJL Equities. The plaintiff allegedly tripped over a raised/uneven sidewalk flag while walking in front of the New York Public Library on the Upper East Side of Manhattan thereby sustaining personal injuries. He subsequently brought suit against various defendants, one of whom impleaded WJL based upon its contract to perform sidewalk restoration work in the area. On summary judgment, WJL argued that the flags it installed were adjacent to the misleveled flag. In granting summary judgment to WJL, the Court held that WJL had met its burden of establishing that it did not perform work on the sidewalk flag that contained the alleged defect. The Court considered the arguments made in opposition by the third-party plaintiff and found them to be without merit.
Althofer v. City of New York et al., Index No. 112806/2011 (N.Y. Co. Sup. Ct., Feb. 21, 2017)
In a decision dated December 21, 2016, Justice Thomas P. Aliotta granted summary judgment dismissing the plaintiff’s complaint and all cross-claims as to our client, Delric Construction Co., Inc. The plaintiff sought damages for personal injuries allegedly sustained when he fell from a wooden plank that extended over a ventilation shaft on the sixth floor of the Staten Island Courthouse under construction. In granting the motion, the Court held that our client was not an agent of the owner and was not otherwise negligent. Delric did not have the authority to supervise, direct or control the plaintiff’s work. Furthermore, Delric had no safety or maintenance obligations on the sixth floor and more specifically in or around the shaft. In addition, the Court found that Delric owed no contractual indemnity, in whole or in part, to any of the defendants because the work on the sixth floor at the time of the accident was being performed for a separate prime contractor and arose from no work on the part of Delric or its subcontractors.
McDonough v. Delric Construction Co., Inc., et al., Index No. 150892/2013 (Richmond Co. Sup. Ct., December 21, 2016)
In a decision dated October 28, 2016, Justice Robert l. Nahman granted summary judgment dismissing the plaintiff’s complaint and all cross-claims as to our client, Paragon Building Restoration, LLC. In the complaint, the plaintiff brought causes of action against our client, the roofing contractor, for common law negligence alleging that he tripped on a piece of cardboard which was placed inside the supermarket to sop up water leaking from the ceiling. In granting the motion, the Court held that our client was free from negligence and did not owe indemnity to the owner of the building because the leak did not arise out of its work.
Ibis-Blake v. Food City, et al., Index No. 80/2012 (Queens County Sup. Ct., Oct. 28, 2016)