A New York appellate court recently ruled against a construction worker seeking summary judgment in a personal injury case. The case, Cano v. 57-51 57th Rd., LLC, centers around a workplace accident that occurred in January 2016, when Oscar Cano fell while working on a carport structure. The court's decision has implications for workers' rights and the responsibilities of contractors and property owners under labor laws.
The ruling affects Cano, who was employed as a diesel technician for Maverick Enterprise Services, Inc. at the time of the incident. He sustained injuries while performing construction work at a property located at 57-55 57th Road in Maspeth, New York. Cano initially filed separate lawsuits against the property owners and the company Phantom Carting, Inc., which were later consolidated into one action.
The dispute arose when Cano moved for summary judgment, asking the court to rule in his favor on the issue of liability against Phantom Carting. He argued that the company violated Labor Law § 240(1), which requires property owners and contractors to provide proper safety measures for workers engaged in construction activities. However, the Supreme Court of Kings County denied his motion, prompting Cano to appeal.
On August 12, 2026, the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York issued its ruling on the case, affirming the lower court's decision. The judges on the panel included Cheryl E. Chambers, Paul Wooten, Lillian Wan, and Phillip Hom. The court found that Cano did not eliminate all factual disputes regarding whether Phantom Carting had control over his work at the construction site.
The court ruled, "The plaintiff failed to eliminate all triable issues of fact as to whether Phantom, a lessee of the subject premises, controlled and supervised his work in the construction of the carport."
The judges noted that under Labor Law § 240(1), a property owner or contractor has a nondelegable duty to ensure worker safety. However, the court emphasized that a lessee, like Phantom Carting, can only be held liable if they had the right to control the work being done. The court referenced previous cases that established the criteria for determining liability under this law, stating, "The key question is whether the defendant had the right to insist that proper safety practices were followed."
The ruling has significant implications for construction workers and companies in New York. It clarifies the responsibilities of lessees and contractors regarding workplace safety and liability. The decision reinforces the need for workers to prove that a contractor or property owner had control over their work environment to hold them accountable for safety violations.
Going forward, this ruling may impact how construction injury cases are litigated in New York. Workers may face challenges in proving liability against companies that lease properties where they work. The decision could also influence how companies approach safety measures and liability in construction projects.
As for Cano, he may consider further legal options. The court's ruling does not prevent him from pursuing other claims or appealing the decision. However, details about any potential appeal or related cases were not available in the court filing.