Upon a search of the record (CPLR 3212[b]) the motion court correctly found that defendants BOP and Tishman are both subject to liability under Labor Law §§ 240(1) and 241(6) (see Santos v Condo 124 LLC,
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Let's get started
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
DOUGLAS v. TISHMAN CONSTR. CORP.
205 A.D.3d 570 (2022)
169 N.Y.S.3d 277
2022 NY Slip Op 03344
Jaydee Douglas, Appellant-Respondent, v. Tishman Construction Corporation et al., Respondents-Appellants, et al., Defendant.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
Decided May 24, 2022.
Decided May 24, 2022.
Attorney(s) appearing for the Case
Mischel & Horn, P.C., New York (Christen Giannaros of counsel), for appellant-respondent.
Fabiani Cohen & Hall, LLP, New York (Kevin B. Pollak of counsel), for respondents-appellants.
Concur—Renwick, J.P., Friedman, Gesmer, Mendez, Higgitt, JJ.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
Cited Cases
- No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.