Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2004

Lezcano v. Metropolitan Life Insurance

Lezcano v. Metropolitan Life Insurance
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided October 14, 2004
11 A.D.3d 303; 782 N.Y.S.2d 451; 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11933
Lezcano v. Metropolitan Life Insurance

Opinion of the Court

Amended judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Jacqueline W. Silbermann, J.), entered February 11, 2004, which, after a jury trial, awarded plaintiffs damages in accordance with CELR article 50-B, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

There was unrebutted testimony at trial that plaintiff Secundino was injured when he fell from a scaffold not equipped with guardrails or other protective devices. Labor Law § 240 (1) imposes absolute liability on owners, contractors and their agents for any breach of the statutory duty that proximately causes a plaintiff’s injury in these circumstances (Panek v County of Albany, 99 NY2d 452, 457 [2003]), a duty that is nondelegable (Ross v Curtis-Palmer Hydro-Elec. Co., 81 NY2d 494, 500 [1993]). The failure of any party to produce another witness to the event is no basis for denying a directed verdict as to liability, absent a bona fide issue, based on more than speculation, as to the injured party’s credibility (Urrea v Sedgwick Ave. Assoc., 191 AD2d 319 [1993]). Defendants’ liability was established as a matter of law by clear evidence that the injured worker had been provided a scaffold without guardrails or other protective devices that might have prevented his fall (see Morrison v City of New York, 306 AD2d 86 [2003]).

*304The jury’s monetary awards do not deviate from what is reasonable compensation under the circumstances. Concur—Tom, J.P., Williams, Marlow and Sweeny, JJ.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.