The plaintiff, a diesel technician, was lying beneath a lifted trailer working on a faulty airbrake system when the trailer fell on him, causing catastrophic injuries. The Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court’s dismissal of Labor Law claims stating that Labor Law § 240(1) was not intended to cover ordinary vehicle repair. The court stated that although the case involved a horrific incident that caused the plaintiff’s grievous injuries, the plaintiff was engaged in ordinary vehicle repair and not a protected activity under the Labor Law, which applies to workers employed in erection, demolition, repairing, altering, painting, cleaning or pointing of a building or structure...