DaBolt v. Bethlehem Steel Corp

In DaBolt v. Bethlehem Steel Corp. (92 AD2d 70 [4th Dept 1983]) plaintiff was injured while repairing a conveyor belt on a "separator." In affirming denial of summary dismissal of plaintiff's Labor Law 200 claim, the Court found an issue of fact as to the amount of control and supervision the owner exercised over the separator, including the amount of control over the details and manner in which work is performed under its contract with" plaintiff's employer, Hackett. Pursuant to its contract with Hackett, the owner had "sole discretion as to the amount" of materials to be delivered to the separator plant and the right to reject any unusable delivery. Moreover, the contract required Hackett to conduct its operations in a safe manner and subjected Hackett's operations to the safety rules and regulations "promulgated by Bethlehem," the owner.