Majority
ECB’s finding that petitioner erected a free-standing structure with a temporary ceiling that obstructed the sprinkler system in violation of the Fire Code is supported by substantial evidence (see generally 300 Gramatan Ave. Assoc. v State Div. of Human Rights, 45 NY2d 176 , 180-181 [1978]).
Article 7-C of the Multiple Dwelling Law (Loft Law) does not preempt enforcement of the Fire Code violation under the circumstances presented (see DJL Rest. Corp. v City of New York, 96 NY2d 91 , 95 [2001]). An analysis of the Loft Law and its legislative findings reveals that the New York State Legislature did not “clearly evince! ] a desire to preempt an entire field thereby precluding any further local regulation” such that implied preemption would apply (Jancyn Mfg. Corp. v County of Suffolk, 71 NY2d 91 , 97 [1987]). Furthermore, petitioner’s express preemption arguments fail, as no section of the Loft Law expressly prohibits enforcement of fire safety regulations against tenants who affirmatively create new fire hazards.
Concur — Tom, J.P., Renwick, Richter, Kapnick and Webber, JJ.
Cases cited
- 300 Gramatan Avenue Associates v. State Division of Human Rights 45 NY2d 176 at 180-181 p. 415
- DJL Restaurant Corp. v. City of New York 96 NY2d 91 at 95 p. 415
- Jancyn Manufacturing Corp. v. County of Suffolk 71 NY2d 91 at 97 p. 415