holding that a landlord may be liable for fire damage resulting from failure to install sprinklers required by city ordinance
How later courts described this case
- holding that a landlord may be liable for fire damage resulting from failure to install sprinklers required by city ordinance
- violation of safety statute evidence of negligence
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
Cutter, J.
(concurring) I concur in the result of part 1 of the opinion on the ground that (subject to proof of other elements of liability, see Wainwright v. Jackson, 291 Mass. 100, 102-103 ) violation of § 1008 (a) of the Boston Building Code may be found to be evidence of negligence; i.e. failure to “exercise reasonable care to keep” a portion of the building (not a common area and not part of the premises let to the plaintiff) “in such condition that others will not be injured.” See Chalfen v. Kraft, 324 Mass. 1, 4 ; Ross v. Broitman, 338 Mass. 770, 772-773 . This is on the assumption that, with respect to the premises let to Mrs. Pantages, the bank could be found to have possessed power to control the installation of sprinklers, the structural condition of the building, and the prevention of dangerous and unlawful use of the premises.