Extended Search
Generic filters
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Search in excerpt
Search in comments
Filter by Custom Post Type
Extended Search
Generic filters
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Search in excerpt
Search in comments
Filter by Custom Post Type

Rice v. City of Cortland – Case Brief Summary (New York)

In Rice v. City of Cortland (262 AD2d 770, 691 N.Y.S.2d 616 [3d Dept 1999], plaintiff was "walking" a metal cable that had been lowered from the boom of a drill rig to its permanent pipe casing.

When he began the process of hooking it to the pipe, the cable touched the power lines overhead, and Mr. Rice was "electrocuted, sustaining electrical burns" (262 AD2d at 770).

The appellate court held that the case could go forward under § 23-1.13; without delving into its specific provisions, the court described § 23-1.13 as providing "specific guidelines to protect workers against electrocution" (id. at 773).