Judgment of Appellate Division reversed and case remitted to that court for determination upon the questions of fact raised in that court (Civ. Prac. Act, § 606), with costs to abide the event. There was evidence that plaintiff was a business visitor to whom defendant owed the duty of keeping the premises reasonably safe ( Haefeli v. Woodrich Engineering Co., 255 N.Y. 442, 448), that this duty was breached and that plaintiff was not guilty of contributory negligence ( Christensen v. Hannon, 230 N.Y. 205, 208; Tobin v. Ariel Holding Corp., 291 N.Y. 606). No opinion.
Concur: LOUGHRAN, Ch. J., LEWIS, CONWAY, DESMOND, THACHER, DYE and FULD, JJ.