Brain Injury from Scaffold Falls: NY Labor Law 240 Rights

What Is Labor Law 240 (The Scaffold Law)?

New York Labor Law § 240 — commonly known as the "Scaffold Law" — requires that scaffolds, hoists, stays, ladders, slings, hangers, blocks, pulleys, and other devices used to elevate workers or materials be constructed, placed, and operated so as to provide proper protection to workers. The law specifically states that scaffolding must be "so constructed, placed and operated as to give proper protection" and that workers must be provided with "proper protection" from elevation-related hazards.

Key features of Labor Law 240:

• Strict liability: The law imposes strict liability on property owners and general contractors — meaning the worker does not need to prove that the owner or contractor was negligent. They need only prove that the safety device (scaffold, ladder, etc.) failed to provide proper protection and that they were injured as a result.
• Absolute duty: The duty under Labor Law 240 is absolute — it cannot be delegated. Property owners and general contractors cannot escape liability by claiming they hired a subcontractor to handle scaffolding safety.
• Applies to elevation-related hazards: The law applies to injuries caused by elevation risks — including falls from scaffolds, ladders, roofs, and other elevated work surfaces, as well as falling objects from elevated positions.
• Covers both commercial and residential construction: The law applies to most construction, demolition, and renovation work in New York.
• Worker cannot be held comparatively negligent (with limited exceptions): If the worker's own conduct contributed to the fall — the worker's recovery is generally not reduced — unless the worker was the sole proximate cause of the accident (e.g., intentionally misusing safety equipment).

How Scaffold Falls Cause Brain Injuries

Scaffold falls can cause brain injuries through several mechanisms:

• Direct impact: The worker's head strikes the ground, a structure, or debris — causing skull fracture, contusion, or intracranial bleeding.
• Acceleration-deceleration injury: Even without direct head impact — the rapid deceleration of the fall can cause the brain to accelerate and decelerate within the skull — causing diffuse axonal injury (DAI) and subdural hematomas from bridging vein tears. [Link to: /brain-injury/diffuse-axonal-injury] [Link to: /brain-injury/subdural-hematoma]
• Falling objects: Tools, materials, or debris falling from scaffolds can strike workers below — causing skull fractures and brain injury. Labor Law 240 also covers falling object injuries.
• Coup-contrecoup injuries: The brain impacts both sides of the skull — causing damage at both the impact site and the opposite side. [Link to: /brain-injury/coup-contrecoup]
• Epidural hematomas: Skull fractures from the fall can tear the middle meningeal artery — causing life-threatening arterial bleeding. [Link to: /brain-injury/epidural-hematoma]
• Subdural hematomas: Bridging vein tears from acceleration-deceleration — causing venous bleeding. [Link to: /brain-injury/subdural-hematoma]

Strict Liability Under Labor Law 240

The most powerful feature of Labor Law 240 is strict liability. Unlike a standard negligence claim — where the injured party must prove that the defendant failed to exercise reasonable care — under Labor Law 240, the worker need only prove:

1. The worker was engaged in a protected activity: Construction, demolition, excavation, or renovation work covered by the statute.

2. An elevation-related hazard existed: The worker was working at an elevation, or there was a risk of falling from an elevated position.

3. The safety device failed to provide proper protection: The scaffold, ladder, or other safety device was inadequate, missing, or malfunctioning — and this failure caused the fall.

4. The worker suffered injury: The fall caused the brain injury.

The worker does NOT need to prove: - That the owner or contractor was negligent - That the owner or contractor knew about the dangerous condition - That the owner or contractor failed to inspect

This makes Labor Law 240 claims significantly easier to prove than standard negligence claims — and is one of the most powerful legal protections for construction workers in the United States.

Who Can Be Held Liable Under Labor Law 240

Under Labor Law 240, the following parties can be held liable for scaffold fall brain injuries:

• Property owners: The owner of the property where the construction is taking place — regardless of whether they directly supervised the work. The duty is absolute and cannot be delegated.
• General contractors: The general contractor overseeing the construction project — who has a non-delegable duty to ensure compliance with Labor Law 240.
• Lessees / tenants: If the construction was being performed for a tenant or lessee — they may also be liable under Labor Law 240.
• Agents of the owner or contractor: Parties acting as agents of the owner or general contractor — such as construction managers or project supervisors.

The Defense's Arguments and How We Counter Them

In Labor Law 240 brain injury cases, the defense typically argues:

• 'The worker was comparatively negligent': The defense argues that the worker contributed to their own fall — by misusing equipment, ignoring safety rules, or working unsafely. Counter: Under Labor Law 240, comparative negligence generally does not reduce the worker's recovery — unless the worker was the sole proximate cause of the accident (e.g., deliberately ignoring provided safety equipment). This is a narrow exception.
• 'Recalcitrant worker': The defense argues that the worker was a 'recalcitrant worker' — someone who deliberately refused to use provided safety equipment. Counter: This defense requires proof that proper safety equipment was provided and the worker deliberately refused to use it. It is a narrow defense that is rarely successful.
• 'Sole proximate cause': The defense argues that the worker's conduct was the sole proximate cause of the accident — meaning the safety device failure was irrelevant. Counter: This requires showing that the safety equipment was adequate and the worker's conduct alone caused the fall.
• 'The brain injury is not real': The defense may argue that the brain injury is not real — particularly with mild TBI and normal imaging. Counter: We prove the brain injury through neuropsychological testing, DTI imaging, witness testimony, and expert testimony. [Link to: /brain-injury/mild-tbi] [Link to: /brain-injury/dti-proof] [Link to: /brain-injury/proving-invisible-injuries]
• 'Pre-existing condition': The defense may argue that the cognitive deficits were pre-existing. Counter: We establish the pre-injury baseline through employment, academic, and medical records.

Workers' Compensation and Labor Law 240 Claims

Construction workers who suffer brain injuries from scaffold falls are typically entitled to workers' compensation benefits — regardless of fault. Workers' compensation provides: - Medical expenses (related to the brain injury) - Lost wages (typically 2/3 of the worker's average weekly wage, up to a cap) - Disability benefits (for permanent disability)

However — workers' compensation does not cover: - Pain and suffering - Full lost wages (only partial) - Loss of future earning capacity (beyond workers' comp limits)

This is where Labor Law 240 claims are critical: A Labor Law 240 claim is a third-party claim — filed against the property owner or general contractor (not the employer). It allows the worker to recover damages that workers' compensation does not — including full lost wages, loss of earning capacity, pain and suffering, and future care costs. The worker can pursue both workers' compensation and a Labor Law 240 claim simultaneously — though workers' compensation may have a lien on part of the recovery. [Link to: /brain-injury/lawyer]

Damages in Scaffold Fall Brain Injury Cases

Damages in Labor Law 240 brain injury cases may include:

• Medical expenses: Including emergency care, surgery, hospitalization, ICU care, rehabilitation, neuropsychological treatment, medications, and ongoing care.
• Full lost wages and loss of earning capacity: Unlike workers' compensation (which pays partial wages) — a Labor Law 240 claim allows recovery of full lost wages and loss of future earning capacity.
• Pain and suffering: Physical pain, cognitive impairment, personality changes, loss of enjoyment of life. New York does not cap non-economic damages.
• Future care costs: Including cognitive rehabilitation, therapy, assistive care, and home modifications — calculated by a life care planner. [Link to: /brain-injury/life-care-plan]
• Loss of consortium.
• Wrongful death damages: If the scaffold fall caused death. [Link to: /wrongful-death-lawyer]

New York Statute of Limitations

Under CPLR § 214, the statute of limitations for a Labor Law 240 claim (which is a negligence/strict liability claim) is 3 years from the date of the accident. For wrongful death (if the scaffold fall caused death), the deadline is 2 years from the date of death (EPTL § 5-4.1). Contact an attorney immediately — construction accident brain injury cases require prompt investigation, including obtaining OSHA reports, site photographs, and witness statements. [Link to: /medication-errors/statute-of-limitations] [Link to: /wrongful-death/statute-of-limitations]

Frequently Asked Questions

The value of a medical malpractice case in New York depends on several factors, including the severity of the injury, the strength of liability evidence, and the economic and non-economic damages involved. New York is one of the few states with no caps on medical malpractice damages, meaning there is no artificial limit on what you can recover. Below are typical settlement ranges based on injury severity.