From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Olsen v. Chase Manhattan Bank

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Apr 20, 1961
9 N.Y.2d 829 (N.Y. 1961)

Opinion

Argued March 28, 1961

Decided April 20, 1961

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department, MARK A. COSTANTINO, J.

Benjamin H. Siff and Alfred E. Herz for appellant.

Patrick E. Gibbons and Royce A. Wilson for respondents.



Under the trial court's instructions, which were not excepted to by plaintiff and thereby constituted the law of the case, it was error to set aside the jury's verdict in favor of defendant bank. As to defendants architects and engineers, the evidence showed that their sole supervisory function was to insure performance of the construction work in accordance with the plans and specifications; to see that standards of safety were met in relation to the permanent construction, adjacent buildings, streets and subways, but not the safety of temporary platforms used in connection with the permanent construction work. There being no duty, we do not reach the question of liability to a third party by reason of nonfeasance.

The judgment should be affirmed, without costs.

Chief Judge DESMOND and Judges DYE, FULD, FROESSEL, VAN VOORHIS, BURKE and FOSTER concur.

Judgment affirmed.


Summaries of

Olsen v. Chase Manhattan Bank

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Apr 20, 1961
9 N.Y.2d 829 (N.Y. 1961)
Case details for

Olsen v. Chase Manhattan Bank

Case Details

Full title:BERNT OLSEN, Appellant, v. CHASE MANHATTAN BANK et al., Respondents

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Apr 20, 1961

Citations

9 N.Y.2d 829 (N.Y. 1961)
215 N.Y.S.2d 773
175 N.E.2d 350

Citing Cases

Welch v. Grant Development Co.

The minority rule imposes liability where the contract vests in the architect extensive supervisory duties,…

Rusin v. Jackson Hgts. Center

Thus, an owner or general contractor retains the common-law duty of exercising reasonable care to make safe…