In Sarigul v. New York Telephone Co. (4 AD3d 168 [2004]), the complaint was dismissed against moving defendant, a non-titleholder, upon an express finding that it neither was an "owner" of the subject cable wire that plaintiff was altering at the time of the incident, or otherwise acted in the capacity of an owner (Id. at 169-170 ["(i)t has been held that the key in ascertaining whether a non-titleholder party is an owner' under the statute is the 'right to insist that proper safety practices were followed and it is the right to control the work that is significant, not the actual exercise or nonexercise of control'"]).