Berman v. Franchised Distributors, Inc.
Cases that cite this one
2 later published cases cite this decision.
- Hernandez v. 46-24 28th St., LLC (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2023)
- Hernandez v. 46-24 28th St., LLC (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2023)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
The plaintiff made a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law on the cause of action alleging a violation of Labor Law § 240 (1) by establishing that the statute was violated and that the violation was a proximate cause of his injuries (see Robinson v East Med. Ctr., LP, 6 NY3d 550, 554-555 [2006]; Klein v City of New York, 89 NY2d 833 [1996]; Leconte v 80 E. End Owners Corp., 80 AD3d 669 [2011]; Ricciardi v Bernard Janowitz Constr. Corp., 49 AD3d 624 [2008]; Rudnik v Brogor Realty Corp., 45 AD3d 828 [2007]; Cordova v 360 Park Ave. S. Assoc., 33 AD3d 750 [2006]; Rivera v Dafna Constr. Co., Ltd., 27 AD3d 545 [2006]; Sinzieri v Expositions, Inc., 270 AD2d 332 [2000]; Bryan v City of New York, 206 AD2d 448 [1994]).
However, in opposition, the defendants raised triable issues of fact as to whether they provided a proper safety device and whether the conduct of the plaintiff, including his alleged consumption of alcohol prior to and during the time that he was working (see Moran v 200 Varick St. Assoc., LLC, 80 AD3d 581 [2011]; Bondanella v Rosenfeld, 298 AD2d 941 [2002]; Podbielski v KMO-361 Realty Assoc., 294 AD2d 552 [2002]; Sergeant v Murphy Family Trust, 284 AD2d 991 [2001]), was the sole
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.