In Lopez v. Chan (102 AD3d 625, 959 NYS2d 67 [1st Dept 2013]), plaintiff slipped and fell down a stairway while lowering a hand truck to deliver cases of beer to a storage cellar below a grocery store. In Chan, the stairway from the sidewalk was the only means of access to the cellar. According to plaintiff, the stairway violated Administrative Code 27-375 (e) and (f) because it lacked handrails, and because the riser heights and tread widths of the flight of stairs were not uniform. The defendant in Chan--the out-of-possession owner--submitted an affidavit from a professional engineer who opined that the allegedly violated provisions only applied to "interior stairs" as defined in the Building Code, and that the cellar stairway did not fit that definition. Instead, the expert stated, the stairway is an "access stairway" under the Building Code. The First Department reasoned that because the cellar was not accessible from the inside of the store, the stairway was not within the definition of "interior stairs" under the 1968 Building Code--the storage area was not a "building," and thus the stairway did not serve as an exit from a "building." Since the 1968 Building Code provisions requiring handrails and uniform riser heights and tread widths only applied to "interior stairs" under Administrative Code 27-375, the plaintiff's claim in Chan against the out-of-possession landlord was dismissed.