In a decision dated October 8, 2025, Hon. Dakota Ramseur of New York County Supreme Court denied the plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment on his Labor Law §240(1) claims and granted our clients MIP One Wall Street Acquisition LLC and J.T. Magen & Co. Inc.’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the plaintiff’s Labor Law §§240(1) and 241(6) claims. MIP One Wall Street owned the premises and contracted with J.T. Magen as the general contractor to provide certain construction and renovation work at the premises. J.T. Magen subcontracted with non-party Independence Carting Inc., a sanitation company that employed the plaintiff, to remove waste and debris from the premises.  In his capacity as a sanitation truck driver, the plaintiff claims that he was struck by a falling wooden pallet, which had been positioned at the edge of an elevated platform, as he was collecting debris from a loading dock at the premises. The Court denied the plaintiff’s motion and granted our clients’ motion in its entirety. The Court found that, as a sanitation truck driver, the plaintiff was not on the premises to perform construction work and he was therefore not within the class of workers protected by the Labor Law because the work he was performing at the time of the alleged accident was not an enumerated activity which was protected under either Labor Law §§240(1) or 241(6). Even assuming, as the plaintiff maintained, that he was responsible for loading debris and construction material onto the truck, in addition to driving the truck to the loading dock, the Court found that none of that work could be considered ancillary to the enumerated activities – erection, demolition, repairing – so as to fall within the ambit of the statutes.

Krysztof Lapinski v. MIP One Wall Street Acquisition LLC et al., Index 150585/2022 (Sup. Ct., N.Y. Co., Oct. 8, 2025)