The New York Court of Appeals handed down yet another decision on Labor Law sec. 240(1) today.  In Montgomery v. Federal Express Corp., the plaintiff — an elevator company helper –was on a roof and found that the stairs to get up to the elevator "motor room" were removed.  Instead of getting an available ladder, the plaintiff used an overturned bucket to get to the motor room and then tried to jump down to the roof after the work was completed.  The plaintiff injured his knee upon jumping down to the roof.

The Court held that the plaintiff did not fall within sec. 240(1), as the Appellate Division, First Department held, because his choice to not use a ladder to access the motor room and descend from it was the sole proximate cause of his injuries.  The Court cited its earlier decision Blake v. Neighborhood Hous. Servs. of N.Y. on sole proximate cause.  This decision seems to narrow the application of sec. 240(1), even where the ladder is not immediately placed where the worker is conducting a protected activity.

An interesting point of this terse memorandum decision is that the reasoning is slightly different than the First Department’s decision below — that is, the Court heavily relies on the sole proximate cause analysis.