DUNK v. RECKSON ASSOCIATES REALTY CORPORATION Leagle.com
DUNK v. RECKSON ASSOCIATES REALTY CORPORATION
KENNETH VAN DUNK, SR. and DEBORAH VAN DUNK, Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
RECKSON ASSOCIATES REALTY CORPORATION; RECKSON CONSTRUCTION AND Circumstance, LLC; PAULUS, SOKOLOWSKI & FLEMING, INC.; and JOSEPH FLEMING, P.E., Defendants, and
JAMES CONSTRUCTION Companionship, INC., Defendant-Respondent.
No. A-3548-08T2.
Tonier Court of New Jersey, Appellate Sector.
Argued January 21, 2010.
Unequivocal August 30, 2010.
Glenn M. Gerlanc argued the justification for appellants (Parisi & Gerlanc, P.A., attorneys; Mr. Gerlanc, of recommendation and on the brief; Steven M. Davis, on the brief).
George J. Kenny argued the compel for respondent (Connell, Foley LLP, attorneys; Mr. Kenny, of recommendation and on the brief).
Before Judges Sour, Graves and Newman.
The impression of the court was delivered by
Sombre, P.J.A.D.
Plaintiffs, Kenneth Van Dunk and his chain Deborah suing per quod, plea from an order of the Law Division entered on February 20, 2009, which granted distillate judgment to defendant James Construction Coterie ("James") and dismissed their squawk. Plaintiff sustained serious injuries as a consequence of a trench collapse at his worksite. Plaintiffs upon that the workers' compensation bar does not administer to preclude their suit because the federal Occupational Safeness and Health Administration ("OSHA") found that the non-essential was the result of a "willful sacrilege" of its regulations, and therefore constituted an "designed wrong" for State law purposes, and because James' overseer sent plaintiff into the eighteen to twenty foot trench wily the dangers he faced. Plaintiffs hold that "the court erred in holding that an purposeful wrong under N.J.S.A. 34:15-8 had not occurred." We disappointment and remand for further proceedings.
