WE FIGHT TO WIN OUR LAWYERS CAN HANDLE EVEN THE MOST DIFFICULT CONSTRUCTION ACCIDENT CASES
No matter how complicated your construction accident is, our lawyers have the experience to make the law work for you.
OUR ADVOCACY FOR CONSTRUCTION WORKERS HELPING THE LAW MOVE IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION
Our New York construction accident lawyers, are extremely proud of the Court decisions which we have won, which have moved the law forward in the right direction and expanded the rights of New York construction workers under New York's Labor Laws. The construction and insurance industries are constantly testing the waters by coming up with ridiculous arguments why the Labor Laws don't apply to certain workers and are trying to diminsh the rights that the Courts have recognized in the past by gradually chipping away and undermining legal precedent. The construction accident lawyers at the Law Office of Michael H. Joseph PLLC, are extremely proud of our legacy of advocacy, in which we have won decisions in both the New York Supreme Court and the Appellate Courts, which have pushed the laws in the right direction and have made sure that New York's laws continue to protect construction workers who are injured on worksites.
WE TOE THE LINE
IF YOU GET HURT DOING DANGEROUS CONSTRUCTION WORK
WE HAVE YOUR BACK
Through our advocacy, we fight to make sure that the construction and insurance industy do not diminish the protection which New York's Labor Laws offer to construction workers in New York. Labor Law 240, which is often called the Ladder Law or the Scaffold Law protects workers who work at heights and requires that contractors and building owners provide safety equipment such as scaffolds, ladders and fall protection, such as harnesses and life lines. Labor Law 241 requires that all contractors and site owners comply with the safety requirements of the New York Industrial Code, which are extensive and cover everything from walkways, to protective gear to safe operations of work. Labor Law 200 imposes upon site owners the common law obligation to provide a safe work site.
OUR NEW YORK CONSTRUCTION ACCIDENT LAWYERS HAVE WON
MAJOR LEGAL DECISIONS
FOR INJURED CONSTRUCTION WORKERS
EVERYONE DOING EXCAVATION IS COVERED
In Ascencio v. Briarcrest at Macy Manor, LLC, 60 A.D.3d 606 (2 Dep't 2009), construction accident lawyer Michael Joseph won a major decision for a Westchester landscaping labor on an Ossining job site. The Defendants argued that since the injured worker was a landscaper, not a construction worker, Labor Law 241, did not apply to him. The Court ruled that since Labor Law 241 requires compliance with the safety rules and regulations in the Industrial Code, in connection with construction, demolition or excavation work, a landscaper performing excavation on a construction site is covered.
HOME HOMEOWNER DENIED SINGLE FAMILY HOME OWNER EXEMPTION
In Morrone v. Biberaj, Westchester Supreme, Index No. 55105/2017, our client was injured on a two family Dobbs Ferry home, when the home owner hired day laborers to replace a roof, and Plaintiff stepped on a nail, which punctured his foot. The nail was from debris thrown around the site by the day laborers. The Court found that the there was an issue of fact as to whether the home owner could be held liable under Labor Law 200 and Labor Law 241, because he acted as the general contractor, where he hired the day laborers, arranged for the dumpster and engaged in the cleaning of the site.
Labor Law 240 Violated Where Workers Had to Use Make Shift Ladder Because Owner Failed to Provide a Tall Enough Ladder
In Ramirez v. Samar Painting, Westchester Index No.: 24418/08, the Westchester Supreme Court granted our motion for summary judgment and found that Labor Law 240 was violated where our client was not provided with a tall enough ladder to perform painting 40 feet in the air and he had to tie two ladders together. The ladders, bent under his weight and he fell to the ground. The Court held that since the contractor and owner didn't provide a scaffold or fall protection, they were absolutely liable for the personal injuries suffered by our client who was a painter.
A Scaffold Which Is Overloaded Violates the Scaffold Law
In Divietri v. 1200 Fifth Assoc, New York County Index, 150166/08, the New York Supreme Court in Manhattan held that our client was entitled to win his case because our construction accident attorneys proved that his accident was caused by a violation of Labor Law 240. Our client was performing an inspection when he stepped on a scaffold and the plank broke under his foot because it was overloaded with bricks that were being used for a facade. The Court held because the scaffold did not support our client's weight, it was inadequate as a matter of law.
Contractor Liable for Over Pressurized Boiler
In Tarasenko v. Evco, Rockland Index No.: 30894/2015, the Rockland Supreme Court held that we established a prima facie case that a plumbing contractor was negligent in creating a dangerous condition, where they upgraded a boiler system, by doubling the BTU units, without upgrading the expansion capacity and in failing to adequate discharge the water that was discharged from a pressure relief valve. Our client who was a maintenance tech at a facility sustained thermal and chemical burns, as well as chemical exposure from scalding water that was discharged from the pressure relief valve.
THINKING OUTSIDE THE BOX
OUR WESTCHESTER CONSTRUCTION ACCIDENT ATTORNEYS SUCCESSFULLY
USED PRODUCT LIABILITY LAW
In Huamani v. C.G. Swackhamer, our clients were injured when a pump jack scaffold collapsed because the lumber broke. Our Westchester construction accident attorneys could not file a traditional Labor Law lawsuit, because the work was being done on a single family home and the clients were employed directly by the general contractor. While most lawyers would have told the clients that there was no case, and a few did, our Westchester construction accident lawyers brought a products liability case against the lumber supply house. Our attorneys realized that the lumber had a large knot, which affected the structural load bearing capacity of the lumber and rendered it unfit for use in a pump jack scaffold. The Westchester Supreme Court found that our White Plains construction accident attorneys established a products liability case because the supply house advertised that it only sold grade 2 or better wood, and the knot rendered the wood below grade 2. The Westchester Supreme Court found that the representation that the supply house sold only grade 2 or better created a warranty and our attorneys could prove a viable case because we established that the lumber was not reasonably fit to be used in a scaffold.