Espinoza v. M&R Const. Group Inc.

What the court wrote

Verbatim from the court's document (public domain). Ellipses mark omitted text; nothing is paraphrased.

construction management agreement (CMA at § 1.48). Furthermore, Alma Hot, project manager for M&R, testified that Shorewood was the owner's “rep” (Hot EBT at 11). In light of the uncontroverted evidence, Shorewood's arguments are unavailing. In its moving papers, Shorewood relies on the following purported authority: “Parrelli v. Temple Beth El of Great Neck, 304 A.D.2d 788, 789 [2d Dept 2003])” (defendants' aff in supp at 14). However, as plaintiff's counsel notes, this case does not exist. The court can find no case **4 that contains this caption; the nearest Second Department case is Berger v Temple Beth El of Great Neck, a defamation action involving none of the issues at dispute in this case. The citation leads to the middle of a Second Department decision in a declaratory judgment matter involving proper land use of a parcel in the County of Westchester. In light of this apparently fabricated caselaw, a sanctions hearing will be scheduled in the decretal section of this decision. Labor Law § 240 (1) Liability under Labor Law § 240 (1) is “absolute” where the failure of a safety device enumerated by the statute is a