From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mortenson v. New York Telephone Company

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department
Dec 14, 1942
179 Misc. 289 (N.Y. App. Term 1942)

Opinion

December 14, 1942.

Appeal from the City Court of the City of New York, New York County.

Irving W. Young for appellant.

Sandro Mayer for respondent.


The first cause of action is insufficient as matter of law. It does not allege facts showing, or from which it can be inferred, that liability was imposed on the defendant in spite of the limitation of liability contained in the contract between the parties. This limitation of liability has been recognized as valid in law. (See Weld v. Postal Telegraph-Cable Co., 199 N.Y. 88; Hamilton Employment Service Inc., v. N.Y. Tel. Co., 253 N.Y. 468.)

The second cause of action is sufficient since it alleges that the defendant wilfully and unlawfully discontinued the service. Against such an allegation the defense of limitation of liability cannot prevail.

Order so far as appealed from modified by dismissing the first cause of action with ten dollars costs and disbursements to appellant, and as modified affirmed.

All concur. Present — McCOOK, HAMMER and SHIENTAG, JJ.


Summaries of

Mortenson v. New York Telephone Company

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department
Dec 14, 1942
179 Misc. 289 (N.Y. App. Term 1942)
Case details for

Mortenson v. New York Telephone Company

Case Details

Full title:ERNEST R. MORTENSON, Respondent, et al., Plaintiffs, v. NEW YORK TELEPHONE…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department

Date published: Dec 14, 1942

Citations

179 Misc. 289 (N.Y. App. Term 1942)
38 N.Y.S.2d 949

Citing Cases

Denmark v. New York Telephone Co.

While telephone companies are not insurers of service they are bound to exercise diligence in serving their…

Abel Holding Co. v. American District Telegraph Co.

We are not bound by such cases and, assuming that they support Bell's position, we decline to follow them or…