Fact-Checked
$6,500,000* settlement after summary judgment on liability. Construction Accident | Labor Law § 240(1) | Labor Law § 241(6) | Ladder Fall | Summary Judgment on Liability
Our client was a union ironworker on a project to renovate a train station in Westchester. His crew was installing metal decking on a platform canopy. So the work would not interfere with peak train schedules, they worked late in the evening and into the night.
The only way onto the canopy roof was an extension ladder. It was about 16 feet long, set against a canopy about 14 feet high, so it barely reached the roof edge and was too short to be tied off at the top. A longer 20 to 24 foot extension ladder had been used earlier on the project, but it was not on site that night. Our client complained that it was the wrong ladder.
Around 1:00 in the morning, while he was up on the canopy, railroad workers asked him for jumper cables for a truck that had broken down on the tracks. To climb down, he had to get down on his hands and knees because the ladder did not come up high enough to grab. As he put his foot on the top rung and started to bring his other leg down, the ladder shifted and tipped over sideways, and he fell with it to the ground.
He suffered a broken leg and injuries to his spine that required surgery. He was a hardworking union ironworker with no interest in staying out of work, but his injuries decided otherwise.
This case was won on two separate Labor Law claims, and each one does a different job.
Section 240(1), the Scaffold Law, covers elevation-related and gravity-related hazards: falls from a height and objects that fall from a height. Owners and contractors must provide ladders, scaffolds and other safety devices that give workers proper protection from those risks. A ladder that is too short and cannot be secured fails that duty. Once a violation is shown, a worker's own carelessness is not a defense.
Section 241(6) works differently. It requires proof that the owner or contractor violated a specific, concrete rule in New York's Industrial Code, not just a general safety principle. One of those rules is 12 NYCRR 23-1.21, which governs ladders and ladderways. Its main parts include:
The section Darren went after was 23-1.21(d)(1). It provides that extension ladders "shall consist of not more than three sections and shall not exceed 60 feet in length when fully extended," and it sets a minimum overlap for every extension ladder. For a ladder up to and including 36 feet long, the minimum overlap is 3 feet.
Here, a roughly 16 foot ladder was set against a canopy roughly 14 feet high, leaving an overlap of only about 2 feet. That shortfall was the specific, measurable violation the court relied on to grant summary judgment under § 241(6), separate from and in addition to § 240(1). Read 12 NYCRR 23-1.21.
Want to understand how these protections work? Read our guide to New York Labor Law 200, 240(1) and 241(6).
Darren moved the case aggressively, taking numerous depositions, and moved for summary judgment at the first opportunity. The opposition relied on a professional engineer's affidavit claiming the ladder could have been set up in a different spot where it would have been long enough. Darren had no expert. He had the facts, the testimony of the witnesses on site and the case law.
It was enough. The court found it undisputed that the ladder was too short to be tied off where it was placed, called the engineer's opinion speculation, and granted summary judgment on liability under both Labor Law § 240(1) and § 241(6).
That ruling mattered for more than liability. In New York, once summary judgment on liability is granted in a construction case, interest on the damages begins to run. The rate depends on who the defendant is:
This case involved Metro-North, so the 4% rate applied. Even so, interest running on a serious injury claim puts real pressure on the defense to resolve the case.
Darren retained a life care planner to project our client's future medical care and an economist to measure his economic losses.
After protracted negotiations, the case settled at mediation for $6,500,000. It was a great result for a hardworking, genuine construction worker who was denied a safe job site.
Hurt on a construction site in New York? Learn more about New York City construction accident claims, or see the case result.
*This case originated with Darren T. Moore, who handled it from start to finish, including preparing and filing all papers, while at a prior law firm, before founding MooreJustice.
Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. This page describes a past matter for general information and is not legal advice.
Business Name: MooreJustice New York City Accident & Injury Lawyers
Business Address: 171 Madison Avenue, Suite 305, New York, NY, USA
Business Phone Number: +1 (917) 809-7014
Darren Moore is the founder of The Law Offices of Darren T. Moore, P.C. and a dedicated New York personal injury attorney. Known for his relentless advocacy and client-focused approach, he has spent his career helping injury victims pursue justice and recover the compensation they deserve. Darren handles a wide range of personal injury matters and is committed to delivering personalized representation for every client.
schedule a free consultation
"*" indicates required fields
