Last reviewed: July 29, 2026 by Jacob Oresky, Esq.

A construction worker obtained a $6.5 million settlement after a Baker scaffold he was working on tipped over at a construction site in Queens County, New York, causing him to fall roughly 12 to 15 feet to the floor and causing head, shoulder, ankle, and spine injuries. The worker had been furnished with a safety harness but no overhead anchorage, leaving him tied off to the very scaffold that failed. The $6.5 million scaffold fall case was brought under New York Labor Law and resolved by settlement before jury selection in July 2026, in an action venued in Queens County Supreme Court.

Case Facts

Outcome $6,500,000 Settlement
Resolution Pre-Trial Settlement
Mechanism Baker Scaffold Tipped Over — Struck by Falling Formwork
Fall Distance Approximately 12 to 15 Feet
Statute New York Labor Law §§ 240(1), 241(6), and 200; Industrial Code 12 NYCRR Part 23
Court Queens County Supreme Court
Year 2026 Settlement
Attorneys Oresky & Associates, PLLC

Scaffold Fall — How the Accident Happened

The $6.5 million scaffold fall case arose from a construction accident in 2020 at a building under construction in Queens County, New York. The construction worker was performing stripping work on the first floor, removing sections of concrete formwork from the underside of a concrete deck. The ceiling stood roughly 18 to 20 feet above the floor, and the work required him to stand on a movable Baker scaffold approximately 12 to 15 feet up.

He had been given a safety harness, but no overhead anchorage point was provided anywhere in the work area. With nothing overhead to connect to, he was left to tie off to the scaffold itself — the same structure he was standing on.

While he was working at that height, a piece of the wooden formwork came loose and struck the scaffold, causing it to tip over. Because the worker was tied off to the scaffold rather than to an independent anchorage, he could not be held in place; both he and the scaffold went to the floor together. He lost consciousness in the fall.

Why New York Labor Law Applied — Elevation Hazards and the Failure of the Safety Device

Labor Law § 240(1) and the Duty to Furnish Proper Protection

New York Labor Law § 240(1) requires owners and contractors to furnish scaffolding, hoists, ropes, harnesses, and other devices that give proper protection to workers exposed to elevation-related risks, and that duty cannot be delegated to the worker’s employer or another contractor. A scaffold that tips over while a worker performs elevated work, and a harness with no overhead anchorage to connect to, both go to the heart of the statute: the safety devices supplied did not do what the law requires them to do. In the $6.5 million scaffold fall case, the worker was left tied off to the scaffold itself, so when the scaffold failed, the fall-protection system failed with it.

Labor Law § 241(6) and the Industrial Code

Labor Law § 241(6) requires that construction areas be equipped and operated to provide reasonable and adequate protection to workers, and it is enforced through the specific standards of the Industrial Code, 12 NYCRR Part 23. The claim alleged violations of numerous Part 23 provisions governing safety devices, scaffolding, and fall protection, including the sections addressing safety belts, harnesses, and lifelines and those governing the construction and stability of scaffolds. Unlike a general negligence claim, a § 241(6) claim must rest on a concrete regulatory violation, which is why the pleading identified the applicable Industrial Code sections.

Labor Law § 200 and Common-Law Negligence

Labor Law § 200 codifies the common-law duty to provide a reasonably safe place to work. It generally reaches a defendant that supervised or controlled the means and methods of the work, or that had actual or constructive notice of an unsafe condition at the site. Those theories were pleaded alongside the elevation-hazard claims.

The parties litigated liability heavily. The worker moved for summary judgment on liability under Labor Law § 240(1); by order dated November 13, 2025, the court denied that motion, and it also denied the defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint. The matter remained contested and was headed toward trial when it resolved.

For a broader discussion of scaffold and elevation-hazard claims in New York, see our New York construction accident practice pages or our Queens construction accident lawyers.

The $6.5 Million Settlement — How the Recovery Was Reached

The action was litigated in Queens County Supreme Court against the owners and the general contractor responsible for the project, and included third-party practice among the construction entities. After the summary judgment motions were decided and the case was placed on the trial calendar, the parties reached a settlement prior to jury selection.

Reaching a recovery of this size required a fully developed record on both liability and damages. Liability turned on the failure of the scaffold and the absence of any overhead anchorage for the worker’s harness. The damages proof drew on the worker’s hospitalization, his course of orthopedic and spinal treatment, imaging consistent with a traumatic brain injury, and expert opinion that he was unable to return to his work.

Oresky & Associates, PLLC secured the $6,500,000 settlement on the worker’s behalf.

Injuries Sustained in the Scaffold Fall

The worker was taken from the site to the hospital, where he was admitted for several days. He sustained a head injury with a period of unconsciousness, along with injuries to his face, his left shoulder, his left ankle, and his cervical and lumbar spine. Imaging later confirmed findings consistent with a traumatic brain injury, and he was treated for post-concussion symptoms.

The ankle and spine injuries required orthopedic and neurosurgical treatment over the following months, and the worker underwent surgery on several of the affected areas. His treating physicians concluded that he was left unable to return to his construction work and limited to sedentary activity, and further treatment was expected. He has not returned to work since the accident.

About the Firm That Handled This Case

This case was handled by Oresky & Associates, PLLC, a New York personal injury firm that has represented injured workers and accident victims throughout the state for more than 30 years. The firm concentrates on construction accidents and New York Labor Law litigation, including scaffold falls, ladder accidents, and other elevation-related claims.

The firm prepares each case as though it will be tried, developing the liability and medical record in full. That approach positioned the $6.5 million scaffold fall case for a substantial recovery even after the liability motions were denied, and the matter was set for a jury.

Related Construction Accident Verdicts and Settlements

Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

Common Questions About the $6.5 Million Scaffold Fall Settlement

Was the $6.5 million recovery a verdict or a settlement?

It was a settlement. The case was litigated through summary judgment motions in Queens County Supreme Court and was on the trial calendar when the parties reached a $6,500,000 settlement in 2026, rather than trying the case before a jury.

How did the scaffold fall happen?

A construction worker was performing formwork stripping on a movable Baker scaffold roughly 12 to 15 feet above the floor when a piece of wooden formwork fell and struck the scaffold, causing it to tip over. Because he was wearing a harness tied off to the scaffold itself — no overhead anchorage having been provided — he fell to the floor with it.

Why did the harness not prevent the fall?

A harness only protects a worker if it is connected to a secure, independent anchorage. Here no overhead anchorage was supplied, so the worker had to tie off to the scaffold he was standing on. When the scaffold tipped, the harness offered no protection because the point it was attached to fell along with the worker.

Who is responsible when a scaffold fails on a New York construction site?

Under New York Labor Law § 240(1), the property owner and the general contractor bear a non-delegable duty to provide proper protection against elevation-related hazards. That responsibility cannot be shifted to the injured worker or to a subcontractor. When a scaffold tips over or a fall-protection system fails — as it did here, where the harness was tied only to the scaffold that failed — the owner and contractor can be held liable for the resulting injuries, regardless of who supplied or set up the equipment.

Does a similar scaffold fall guarantee a similar recovery?

No. Every construction accident case is different. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome, and the value of any claim depends on the specific facts, injuries, and legal circumstances involved.

Get Answers About Your New York Scaffold Accident Case

Oresky & Associates, New York Construction Accident Attorneys

Oresky & Associates, PLLC, has spent more than 30 years representing injured workers throughout New York. The firm investigates how a safety device failed, identifies every owner and contractor bound by the Labor Law’s non-delegable duties, and develops the full evidential picture in order to obtain maximum compensation for our clients.

If you or a loved one was injured in a scaffold fall or another New York construction accident, contact Oresky & Associates, PLLC, for a free, confidential consultation to discuss your legal options. Call (718) 993-9999.