Construction Site Personal Injury Litigation in New York: Labor Law §§ 200, 240(1), and 241(6) – SEO Blog Format (2025)

What is New York Labor Law § 200?

Labor Law § 200 codifies the common-law duty of an owner or general contractor to provide a safe workplace.

Key Facts:
– Applies to owners and contractors who control the work or the premises.
– Requires evidence of negligence and notice of the hazard.
– No recovery unless the defendant was at fault.

New York Labor Law § 240(1): The Scaffold Law

Section 240(1) provides strict liability for certain gravity-related injuries during construction work.

Covered Activities:
– Demolition
– Erection
– Alteration
– Repair
– Painting or cleaning

Injury Must Involve:
– A fall from a height, or
– An object falling due to elevation differential

Why It Matters:
– Fault is irrelevant. Even if the worker was careless, they can still recover.
– Liability is absolute if a safety device was not provided or failed.

Labor Law § 241(6): Liability for Industrial Code Violations

This statute requires proof of a specific violation of the New York Industrial Code (12 NYCRR Part 23).

Requirements:
– A concrete and specific safety rule must have been violated.
– The injury must occur during construction, demolition, or excavation.
– Comparative fault is allowed—damages can be reduced.

Eligibility to Bring a Claim Under Labor Law

Who Can Sue?
– Be engaged in construction-related work
– Injured during an enumerated activity
– Bring suit against a qualifying defendant (owner, GC, or their agent)

Who Is Excluded?
– Homeowners of 1-2 family homes (if not directing the work)
– Subcontractors (unless they had supervisory authority)
– Workers performing routine maintenance

Common Defenses and Pitfalls

Sole Proximate Cause:
– If the injury was entirely the result of the worker’s actions, the claim may be barred.

Recalcitrant Worker Doctrine:
– Used sparingly. Requires evidence the worker refused to use an available safety device after being instructed.

Strategy: Plead Multiple Causes of Action

Savvy legal teams often allege all three statutory violations plus common-law negligence to preserve the case.

| Theory       | Burden of Proof      | Fault Required | Common Defenses              |
|————–|———————-|—————-|——————————|
| § 200        | Negligence + Notice  | Yes            | No control, no notice        |
| § 240(1)     | Gravity + No Device  | No             | Sole proximate cause         |
| § 241(6)     | Code Violation       | No             | No specific rule violated    |

Recent 2025 Case Law Examples

Rodriguez v. Silver Rock Contracting (2025):
Worker fell from scaffold with no guardrails while repairing windows. Court found § 240(1) liability.

Gonzalez v. Midtown Renovations (2025):
Plaintiff slipped on unsecured plywood. Code violation upheld under § 241(6).

Liu v. Hudson Prop. Mgmt. (2025):
Window cleaner’s § 240(1) claim dismissed—task deemed maintenance.

Damages and Litigation Trends in 2025

Rising Settlements:
– Many cases now settle between $2 million to $8 million.

Insurance Company Tactics:
– Surveillance
– Proximate cause arguments
– Challenging specificity of Code violations

Final Thoughts: Know the Law, Protect the Worker

New York’s Labor Law protections are powerful tools. Successful litigation hinges on:
– Understanding who qualifies
– Demonstrating a statutory violation
– Countering anticipated defenses