In a recent personal injury case entitled Troup v. Bovis Lend Lease, et al., New York’s Supreme Court decided that a security guard working at a construction site is not an employee protected by Labor Law §200, the codification of the common-law duty to provide employees with a safe work environment. In Troup, the plaintiff security guard was assaulted by a construction worker after instructing that worker that he could not enter the job site without proper identification. The plaintiff sued the owner of the building, the general contractor and the construction manager, alleging violations of Labor Law §200 and common-law negligence.

In seeking dismissal of the claims, the defendants argued that as a security guard, the plaintiff was not entitled to the protections of the Labor Law, and the Court agreed. The Court reasoned that to be liable under a Labor Law §200 claim, an owner or contractor must have created or had notice of the alleged dangerous condition that caused the accident. The Court opined that a security guard is simply not a person who is entitled to the protection of the Labor Law because he was not permitted to work on the building or structure and he was not performing work necessary and incidental to the erection or repair of a building or structure.

Thanks to Jeremy Seeman for his contribution to this post. For more information, please contact Nicole Y. Brown at .