New York Court of Appeals, 1966

Joyce v. Rumsey Realty Corp.

New York Court of Appeals · Decided March 24, 1966 · Desmond

17 N.Y.2d 118; 216 N.E.2d 317; 269 N.Y.S.2d 105; 1966 N.Y. LEXIS 1495

Cases that cite this one

26 later published cases cite this decision. The 25 that cite it most often are listed here.

Zimmer v. Chemung County Performing Arts, Inc. (N.Y. 1985)
Monroe v. City of New York (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1979)
Curby Toussaint v. Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (N.Y. 2022)
Michael Cutaia v. The Board of Managers of the 160/170 Varick Street , Condominium (N.Y. 2022)
Madsen v. Catamount Ski Resort (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2018)
McCay v. J.A. Jones-GMO, LLC (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2010)
Sheila C. v. Povich (New York Supreme Court 2003)
Kyle v. City of New York (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2000)
Carpio v. Tishman Construction Corp. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1997)
Robinson v. NAB Construction Corp. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1994)
Iannelli v. Olympia & York Battery Park Co. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1993)
Allen v. City of Buffalo (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1990)
Hernandez v. New York City (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1990)
Gandley v. Prestige Roofing & Siding Co. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1989)
Anarumo v. Terminal Construction Corp. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1988)
Johnson v. Riggio Realty Corp. (New York Supreme Court 1988)
Picciotto v. Molloy College (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1987)
Heath v. Soloff Construction, Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1985)
Brant v. Republic Steel Corp. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1982)
Allen v. Cloutier Construction Corp. (N.Y. 1978)
Bass v. Standard Brands, Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1978)
Hirsch v. Graeber (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1976)
The People v. Woodell (Ill. App. Ct. 1971)
COSMOPOLITAN NAT. BANK OF CHICAGO v. Heap (Ill. App. Ct. 1970)
Cosmopolitan National Bank of Chicago v. Heap (Ill. App. Ct. 1970)

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

Chief Judge Desmond.

At the end of the trial there was, between plaintiff and defendant Bumsey, no unresolved issue as to liability and so a verdict was properly directed for plaintiff against Bumsey, leaving to the jury the fixation of the damages. Bumsey had unquestionably violated the unequivocal command of subdivision 1 of former section 241 of the Labor Law that the contractor must complete the flooring as the building progresses. Plaintiff was moving planks on the fourth floor. The first, second and third levels had not been floored over as required by the statute and plaintiff, standing on a plank which broke, fell through the openings into the basement. The duty imposed by the statute and violated by defendant Bumsey was “ a flat and unvarying” one (Koenig v. Patrick Constr. Corp., 298 N. Y. 313, 318) and again as we said in Koenig: “ For breach of that duty, thus absolutely imposed, the wrongdoer is rendered liable without regard to his care or lack of it.” Or, as we put it in Major v. Waverly & Ogden (7 N Y 2d 332, 334), a violation of such a statute is “ conclusive evidence of negligence ”. Conclusive evidence of negligence calls for a directed verdict. It is, of course, undeniable that the statute is for the protection of workers situated as was plaintiff (see Bergen v. East 84th St. Constr. Corp., 16 N Y 2d 644).

That plaintiff was caused to fall by the breaking of a plank is beside the point. No one is ever physically injured by the existence of an unguarded opening. Something must project him into the hole but that something cannot be more than a concurrent cause of the injury. The statute puts absolute and unconditional liability on the contractor and in favor of the *123workman who falls through the floor opening which the statute insists must he covered. To hold otherwise would be to deprive the worker of the protection afforded him by the Labor Law. To say that a jury in such a case could bring in a no cause verdict would be to say that the jury can nullify the statute.

The order should be affirmed, with costs.

Judges Ftjld, Van Voorhis, Burke, Scileppi, Bergan and Keating concur.

Order affirmed, with costs to Butler against Joyce and to Joyce and Mara against Rumsey.

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