In Singleton v. City of New York (13 Misc. 3d 1173, 1177-1178, 827 N.Y.S.2d 535 [Sup Ct, Kings County 2006]), the court dealt with the application of Labor Law § 27-a where the plaintiff/police officer alleged inadequate protections/padding in a training room, during an exercise that allegedly included the enactment of street confrontation.
Defendants moved pursuant to CPLR§ 3211 to dismiss the claim.
The court stated:
"it cannot yet be determined whether such a training exercise was sufficiently routine, standard and regulated or whether it could be construed as constituting a more unpredictable risk either inherent in, or unique to, police work....Given that plaintiff's section 205-e claim, as pleaded, essentially alleges that she was provided with a room inadequate for its purpose and no safety equipment with which to perform her assigned task of participating in the subject training exercise, the court finds that the violation of section 27-a alleged herein is properly construed as analogous to the provision of a dangerous horse to the plaintiff in Campbell or the unpadded computer console in Balsamo, and does not merely implicate policies utilized to manage the inherent dangers of police work as was the case in Williams. Accordingly, having adequately pleaded a cognizable violation of section 27-a by the City, plaintiff's section 205-e claim is not subject to dismissal under CPLR 3211 (a) (7)" (id. at 1177-1178).