Misseritti v. Mark IV Constr. Co

In Misseritti v. Mark IV Constr. Co., 86 NY2d 487 [1995] the plaintiff's decedent was a mason performing masonry work at a construction site. He was severely injured when a completed, concrete-block fire wall collapsed on him. He had dismantled the scaffolding used to erect the fire wall, and was sweeping the floor in the area (id. at 489-491). The wall had not yet been vertically braced. The Court found that there was no evidence showing that he was working at an elevated level at the time of the tragic accident (id.). It held that the collapse of the fire wall was "the type of 'ordinary and usual' peril a worker is commonly exposed to at a construction site and not an elevation-related risk subject to the safeguards prescribed by Labor Law 240 (1)" (id. at 489). It construed the term "braces" in the statute to mean "those used to support elevated work sites not braces designed to shore up or lend support to a completed structure" (id. at 491.)