April 28, 2008
New York’s highest court ruled that a Manhattan high-rise owner is liable for injuries to a tenant’s workman, even though the worker was hired without the landlord’s consent and violated the lease agreement calling for ‘written permission’ before work could be done.
The court ruled (5-2) that allowing a lease provision to insulate the owner would “eviscerate the strict liability protection” state Labor Law provides workers.
The suit was filed by the injured workman. The judges took no position on the landlord’s third-party claims against the tenant.
In a dissent that faulted the majority’s “literalism,” Judge Robert Smith, with Judge Susan Read concurring, wrote that the lease specifically prohibits the tenant from hiring a contractor to make any alterations without the landlord’s prior written consent. “I do not see how the statutory goal of preventing workplace accidents is advanced by holding a landlord liable in a situation like this. What could anyone expect the landlord to do to prevent the accident, other than what it did?”
Here’s some steps the landlord could take:
- Install metal ‘tool detectors’ at the doors to stop clandestine workmen from entering the building.
- Hire security people to profile ‘contractor types’ (get ready for a discrimination lawsuit from the trade unions)
- Move to a state where contract law is upheld.
Score another one for the trial attorneys.
[…] admin wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptNew York’s highest court ruled that a Manhattan high-rise owner is liable for injuries to a tenant’s workman, even though the worker was hired without the landlord’s consent and violated the lease agreement calling for ‘written … […]
[…] Read the rest of this great post here […]