In New York’s Labor Law �202, which protects window washers, received little attention until the Third Department decision in Bauer v. Female Academy of the Sacred Heart (275 AD2d 809), a case I discussed last year (“The Window Washer’s Dilemma,” The New York Law Journal, Jan. 2, 2001, on my Web site at netacc.net/ ~amsir/Contents/LL_202_art.html). The Court of Appeals has now reversed the Appellate Division in part (2002 N.Y. LEXIS 548, decided March 26, 2002), holding that a plaintiff can maintain causes of action under both �202 and �240, the Scaffold Law. But it also held that �202, unlike the Scaffold Law, is not an absolute liability statute, and the plaintiff’s negligence is always available as a defense.
Irony and Re-Interpretations
