Court Opinion

ID: 9786940
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 00:06:02.503399+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:36:50.363912
License: Public Domain

Fttld, J.
(dissenting). I would affirm. In my judgment, this is clearly a case in which the landlord, having not the slightest supervision or control of the painting contractors’ work and having only constructive notice of the dangerous condition which they created, is entitled to recovery over against such contractors. (See, e.g., McFall v. Compagnie Maritime Belge, 304 *484N. Y. 314, 330-331; Tipaldi v. Riverside Mem. Chapel, 298 N. Y. 686, affg. 273 App. Div. 414, 420; Wischnie v. Dorsch, 296 N. Y. 257, 261.)
Conway, Ch. J., Desmond, Dye, Froessel and Burke, JJ., concur with Van Voorhis, J.; Fuld, J., dissents in an opinion.
Judgment modified in accordance with the opinion herein, with costs in this court and in the Appellate Division to defendants Katz and Weinberg against defendant 615 West Corp., and, as so modified, affirmed, with costs to plaintiffs against all of the defendants.