Falling Object Liability

, New York Law Journal

   | 0 Comments

In his Construction Accident Litigation column, Brian J. Shoot writes: Per a Court of Appeals decision rendered earlier this year, Labor Law §240(1) applies only if the plaintiff demonstrates that the object that fell was being hoisted or secured at the time it fell, or "required securing for the purposes of the undertaking." The first option is simple enough. But when does an object "require securing"? For that matter, what is the pertinent "undertaking"?

What's being said

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article# 1202654579514

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.