The New York Court of Appeals decided Chizh v. Hillside Campus Meadows Assocs., which involved whether the work the plaintiff was performing constituted a “repair” under Labor Law Section 240(1) or just routine maintenance. The Court held that the plaintiff’s work — he was injured in the course of removing, repairing and reinstalling a single window screen at an apartment complex — constituted routine maintenance (see the Appellate Division, Fourth Department underlying decision here). The Court distinguished the facts in this case from those in Prats v. Port Auth. of N.Y. & N.J. With this short memorandum decision, the Court has come closer to boxing in what constitutes a “repair” and what constitutes “routine maintenance.”