New York

Does a falling object need to be in the process of being hoisted or secured to come within the ambit of Labor Law sec. 240(1)?  The New York Court of Appeals in Quattrocchi v. F.J. Sciame Contr. Co. clarified the point and reiterated its decision in Outar v. City of New York (see prior post).  In Quattrocchi, the plaintiff alleged that he was struck by falling planks that had been placed over open doors as a makeshift shelf to facilitate the installation of an air conditioner above a doorway.  

The Court of Appeals agreed with the Appellate Division, Second Department that it was not dispositive that the planks were not in the process of being hoisted or secured when the accident happened, citing Outar for the proposition.  The Appellate Division Majority and Dissenting Opinions are essential to understanding the Court of Appeals' decision (see decision here).