New York
Personal Injury Appeals
Samuel v. Simone Dev. (2004)
The plaintiff was a
carpet installer who was injured when he fell from a ladder
while hanging carpet on the wall of a sound studio. Plaintiff
asserted that he was a construction worker and was covered by
Section 240(1) of the Labor Law. The defendant moved to dismiss
the case claiming that the plaintiff was not a construction
worker and not covered by the Labor Law. The Judge in the lower
Court agreed with the defendant and dismissed the case. Mr.
Levitz filed an appeal and argued that no only should
plaintiff’s case be reinstated but plaintiff should be granted
summary judgment. Mr. Levitz convinced the Appellate Division
that the plaintiff was a construction worker. The Appellate
Division reversed the lower court’s decision and granted
plaintiff summary judgment. The case settled for $590,000.
Zervos v City of New York (2004)
The injured
plaintiff was assigned to paint the exterior of a school
building. There was a narrow space, between the scaffolding and
the building. The injured plaintiff was on a stepladder under
the scaffold painting, while working with his head down, he was
struck by a piece of brick which fell from above through the
narrow space between the scaffold and the building. The
plaintiff did not fall off the ladder. The defendant moved to
dismiss the case claiming that there was no violation of Labor
Law 240(1) and that were no specific violations of the
Industrial Code. Mr. Levitz was retained by another firm to
handle the Appeal in this matter. Mr. Levitz argued and the
Appellate Division held that a jury must decide if Section
240(1) of the Labor Law was violated. The Appellate division
also held that the plaintiff had plead specific sections of the
Industrial code. The case was settled for $310,000.00
Padilla v. Frances Schervier Hous. Dev. Fund Corp., (2003)
Plaintiff was
situated inside a concrete utility excavation vault. At the
bottom of the vault there was an opening in its floor
approximately 3 feet by 5 feet. A concrete sump housing was to
be inserted into the opening. Plaintiff's job was to guide the
concrete sump housing, which a backhoe was lowering into the 3
by 5 opening located at the vault's bottom. They were not able
to successful lower the concrete sump and the concrete housing
"slipped" and pinched plaintiff foot between the housing and the
edge of the opening, amputating two toes. The lower court
dismissed plaintiff’s case and Mr. Levitz was retained to handle
the appeal. Mr. Levitz argued that the defendants had violated
Section 241(6) of the Labor Law and the case must be decided by
a jury. The Appellate Division agreed and reversed the decision
of the lower court. The case settled for $300,00.00.
Bianco v. LiGreci, (2002)
Mr. Levitz was hired
to handle this appeal where a default had been taken against the
plaintiff. The default was vacated by the lower court and the
defendant appealed. The Appellate Court accepted Mr. Levitz’
arguments and sustained the Lower court’s Order vacating the
default.
Vozila v. Brinks Co., (2001)
The plaintiff
tripped on a ramp while exiting a bank. The ramp had been put
on the steps by Brinks to bring coins into the bank. The
defendants argued that the ramp was an open and obvious defect
and moved to dismiss the case. Mr. Levitz retained an engineer
to explain why the ramp was not open and obvious. After
defendants’ motion for summary judgment was denied in the lower
court they appealed. The Appellate Division denied the Appeal.
The case settle for $300,000.00 after a verdict on liability and
damages.
Romanello
v. Riverwoods Chappaqua Corp., (2001)
Plaintiff was
employed by to perform punch list work on the construction of
numerous condominiums. Plaintiff was repairing a garage door
opener for the new owner and fell from a ladder injuring his
neck and back. Defendant moved for summary judgment arguing
that defendant was not an owner under Section 240(1) of the
Labor Law. The motion for summary judgment was granted. Mr.
Levitz was retained to handle the Appeal. Mr. Levitz convinced
the Appellate Division that a jury must decided if the defendant
was an owner under Section 240(1) of the Labor Law nad
overturned the decision of the Lower Court. The case settled
for $400,000.00
Contact the New York City
personal injury lawyers
at
Kuharski, Levitz & Giovinazzo
to discuss your case. We
offer a
free initial consultation
so you can have your
case assessed by a principal
attorney.
Contact us today to schedule
a free consultation with an
experienced New York City
personal injury lawyer:
