Case Name: Thomas Boyle, Appellant, v. Andrew J. Robinson Company and Others, Respondents
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1912-12-06
Citations: 154 A.D. 1
Docket Number: 
Parties: Thomas Boyle, Appellant, v. Andrew J. Robinson Company and Others, Respondents.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 154
Pages: 1–7

Head Matter:
Thomas Boyle, Appellant, v. Andrew J. Robinson Company and Others, Respondents.
First Department,
December 6, 1912.
Negligence—injury to employee of sub-contractor by defective hoisting elevator — common-law liability of person furnishing elevator —> statutory liability of general contractor — sub-contractor not liable.
A person who furnishes and erects a hod-hoisting elevator for use by a contractor in constructing a building does not come within section 18 of the Labor Law, requiring persons directing another to perform labor in the erection of a building to furnish safe hoists, etc. But such person may be found liable at common law for injuries received by an employee of a sub-contractor caused by the fact that the hoisting cable, not being subject to any unusual load, broke so as to raise a prima facie case of negligence, there being proof that the defect could have been discovered by inspection.
The general contractor who caused the hoist to be installed for its use and for use by its sub-contractors and their employees may, under the circumstances, be held liable for such injury under the statute.
But the employer of the person injured, being a sub-contractor engaged in plastering the building, is not liable for the injury caused by the defective elevator.
Laughlin and Dowling, JJ., dissented in part, with opinion.
Appeal by the plaintiff, Thomas Boyle, from a judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of the defendants, entered in the office of the clerk of the county of New York on the 13th day of February, 1912, upon the dismissal of the complaint as to each of the defendants (excepting the defendant William Baumgarten, who was not served) at the close of plaintiff’s case by direction' of the court on a trial at the New York Trial Term.
Benjamin Patterson, for the appellant.
Edward S. Clinch, for the respondent Andrew J. Robinson Company.
Robert L. Redfield, for the respondent William Baumgarten & Co.

Opinion:
Ingraham, P. J. J.:
For the reasons stated by Mr. Justice Laughlin in his opinion, we agree that the judgment as against the Andrew J. Robinson Company and the Stanley Hod Elevator Company should be reversed, and a new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event.
As to the defendants Baumgarten, the judgment is affirmed . upon the authority of BohnhoffY, Fischer (149 App. Div. 747).
McLaughlin and Miller, JJ., concurred; Laughlin and Dowling, JJ., dissented.