There was proof that the premises were occupied by an electrical supply company as well as by the third-party defendant. This was sufficient to sustain a finding of multiple occupancy within the meaning of subdivision 2 of section 315 of the Labor Law. Defendant was, therefore, the owner of a "tenant-factory building" and owed plaintiffs a nondelegable statutory duty to safely maintain the elevator therein (Labor Law, § 316, subd. 2). Defendant, however, was entitled...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.