A New York court recently ruled in the case of Letersky v. Militello Farms, Inc., reinstating a Labor Law claim that had been dismissed. The decision affects workplace safety regulations and the responsibilities of employers in construction-related injuries.
The ruling comes from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York on July 24, 2026, under docket number 459 CA 25-01163. The case centers around Kevin Letersky, the plaintiff, and Militello Farms, Inc., along with Russo Development, Inc., which is the defendant in this matter. This decision is significant as it addresses the protections provided under New York's Labor Law, particularly for workers involved in construction activities.
In this case, Letersky alleged that he was injured while working on a construction site managed by Militello Farms. He claimed that Russo Development, which was involved in the project, failed to provide adequate safety measures as required by Labor Law § 240 (1). This law is designed to protect workers from elevation-related hazards on job sites. The dispute escalated when Russo Development sought to have the claim dismissed, arguing that they were not liable under the law.
The case reached the Appellate Division after Letersky's initial claims were partially dismissed by the Supreme Court in Chautauqua County. The lower court had granted Russo Development's motion to dismiss the Labor Law claim, prompting Letersky to appeal the decision. The appellate judges were tasked with reviewing the lower court's ruling and determining whether the Labor Law protections applied in this case.
The court ruled in favor of Letersky, stating, "the order so appealed from is unanimously modified on the law by denying that part of the motion of defendant Russo Development, Inc. seeking summary judgment dismissing the Labor Law § 240 (1) cause of action against it and reinstating that cause of action against it." This decision effectively reinstates Letersky's claim against Russo Development, allowing him to pursue legal action under the Labor Law.
The ruling was made by a panel of judges including Curran, Bannister, Montour, Greenwood, and Hannah. The court's decision emphasizes the importance of adhering to safety regulations in the construction industry and holds employers accountable for ensuring a safe working environment.
This ruling has broader implications for workers in New York, particularly those in the construction sector. It reinforces the legal protections available to workers who may be injured due to unsafe working conditions. By reinstating the Labor Law claim, the court sends a clear message about the responsibilities of employers to provide safe work environments.
The impact of this ruling may encourage more workers to come forward with claims related to workplace safety, knowing that the courts are willing to uphold their rights under the Labor Law. It also serves as a reminder to employers to prioritize safety measures to avoid potential legal repercussions.
Looking ahead, this case could influence similar disputes in the future as it sets a precedent for how Labor Law claims are handled in New York. Employers may need to reassess their safety protocols and ensure compliance with the law to protect their workers and mitigate legal risks.
As for the possibility of an appeal, details were not available in the court filing regarding whether Russo Development plans to contest the ruling further. However, the reinstatement of the Labor Law claim allows Letersky to continue his pursuit of justice in this matter.