Cases from cite.case.law:

HIGHWOODS PROPERTIES, INC. v. MILLAR ELEVATOR SERVICE COMPANY, 247 So. 3d 639 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . Highwoods remained vicariously liable to the plaintiff by operation of its non-delegable duty under section 399.02 . . .

VITRANO, v. FLORIDA POWER LIGHT COMPANY,, 190 So. 3d 89 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . Nor are the NESC code sections like the provisions of section 399.02(5)(b), Florida Statutes, providing . . .

SCHINDLER ELEVATOR CORPORATION, a v. CARVALHO,, 895 So. 2d 1103 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

. . . Although she claims that there was sufficient evidence to show a violation of section 399.02(5)(b), Florida . . .

SAYLOR, v. UNITED STATES, 315 F.3d 664 (6th Cir. 2003)

. . . United States of America v. 399.02 Acres of Land, Civ. No. 2243 (E.D.Ky. Oct. 7, 1992). . . . Final Decision on the Merits Appellants argue that a final decision was not made in United States v. 399.02 . . . In United States v. 399.02 Acres of Land, the district court conducted a full and fair evidentiary hearing . . . at the 1990 hearing that constituted the basis of the district court’s decision in United States v. 399.02 . . . that they were not in privity with their fellow heirs of Alice Asher and therefore United States v. 399.02 . . .

GOLDEN SHORELINE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, v. Jo McGOWAN III, 787 So. 2d 109 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

. . . McGowan and their co-plaintiffs based upon an alleged violation of section 399.02(5)(b), Florida Statutes . . . McGowan a partial summary judgment on liability, that section 399.02(5)(b) made Golden Shoreline strictly . . . We conclude that section 399.02(5)(b) established this second type of duty — to protect those using elevators . . . In reviewing whether a violation of the precursor statute to section 399.02(5)(b) would require a negligence . . . We, too, conclude that a violation of section 399.02(5)(b) constitutes negligence per se but not of the . . .

SZILAGYI v. NORTH FLORIDA HOTEL CORP. d b a a k a v. UNITED STATES ELEVATOR CORP., 610 So. 2d 1319 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

. . . Section 399.02(5)(b), Florida Statutes (1985). . . . At the charge conference, Appellants received an instruction on section 399.02, that the elevator owner . . . Humphrey, 427 So.2d 214 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983) the district court held that a violation of section 399.02 . . . The plaintiff requested that section 399.02(6)(b) (now renumbered (5)(b)) and Jury Instruction 4.9 be . . . The opinion notes that section 399.02(2), Florida Statutes (1987), adopted the Elevator Safety Code, . . .

BLACK, v. MONTGOMERY ELEVATOR COMPANY,, 581 So. 2d 624 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

. . . The trial judge denied the elevator company’s request for the court to instruct the jury that section 399.02 . . . .-02(5)(b), Fla.Stat., then section 399.02(6)(b), provided that the owner or hb duly appointed agent . . .

NICOSIA v. OTIS ELEVATOR COMPANY,, 548 So. 2d 854 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)

. . . Moreover, section 399.02(5)(b), Florida Statutes (1987), makes the elevator owner responsible for the . . . Failure to comply with section 399.02 constitutes negligence per se. See Davis v. . . . On the other hand, section 399.02(5)(b) does not apply to Otis, the service contractor. . . . Prior to its amendment in 1983, section 399.02(5)(b), then section 399.02(6)(b), provided: The owner . . . Accordingly, it was error to direct a verdict for the building owner who was charged by section 399.02 . . .

BURNS, v. OTIS ELEVATOR COMPANY,, 550 So. 2d 21 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)

. . . Corp., 408 So.2d 659, 660 n. 1 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); § 399.02(5)(b), Fla.Stat. (1983). . . .

DAVIS, v. OTIS ELEVATOR COMPANY,, 515 So. 2d 277 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987)

. . . trial court committed reversible error in refusing to instruct the jury that a violation of section 399.02 . . . Davis requested that section 399.02(6)(b), Florida Statutes (1979) and standard Jury Instruction 4.9 . . . Section 399.02(6)(b), Florida Statutes (1979) reads, in pertinent part: The owner or his duly appointed . . .

L. BRYAN, v. STATE DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS REGULATION,, 438 So. 2d 415 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)

. . . Section 399.02 also provided that the owner or his “agent” shall be responsible for the safe operation . . . Section 399.02(2) provided for the division’s adoption of an Elevator Safety Code. . . . .

RELIANCE ELECTRIC COMPANY, HAUGHTON ELEVATOR DIVISION, v. HUMPHREY,, 427 So. 2d 214 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)

. . . The issue is whether a violation of Section 399.02(6)(b), Florida Statutes (1981) (which requires proper . . . Section 399.02(6)(b) falls squarely within the second category. . . .

BENITEZ, v. DADE COUNTY, 21 Fla. Supp. 82 (Dade Cty. Cir. Ct. 1962)

. . . Commission in accordance with the mandate of the applicable Florida statute (Florida Statutes 1959 §399.02 . . .

BETHEL v. DADE COUNTY, 16 Fla. Supp. 162 (Dade Cty. Cir. Ct. 1960)

. . . Industrial Commission in accordance with the mandate of the applicable Florida statute, (F.S. 1959 § 399.02 . . .

BERMAN, v. DADE COUNTY, 15 Fla. Supp. 160 (Dade Cty. Civ. Ct. Rec. 1960)

. . . Florida Statutes § 399.02 (2) requires the Industrial Commission to adopt a safety code which will be . . .