From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Wakeman v. N.Y., N.H. H.R.R. Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 15, 1936
247 App. Div. 462 (N.Y. App. Div. 1936)

Opinion

May 15, 1936.

Appeal from Supreme Court of New York County.

Kenneth O. Mott-Smith of counsel [ Clive C. Handy, attorney for The New York Central Railroad Company; John M. Gibbons, attorney for New York, New Haven and Hartford Railroad Company], for the appellants.

Thomas J. O'Neill of counsel [ Edward F. Cavanagh, Jr., with him on the brief], for the respondent.

Present — MARTIN, P.J., McAVOY, GLENNON, DORE and COHN, JJ.; GLENNON and DORE, JJ., dissent and vote to affirm.


There is in this case no showing that the defendants had actual or constructive notice of the alleged dangerous and unsafe condition of the washroom floor which it is claimed was the cause of plaintiff's fall and resultant injuries; nor is there any proof that the alleged dangerous condition was created by defendants' own servants. In the circumstances, plaintiff failed to establish any cause of action against defendants. ( Boettcher v. Dowling, 243 App. Div. 397; affd., 270 N.Y. 557.)

The judgment should accordingly be reversed, with costs, and the complaint dismissed, with costs.


Judgment reversed, with costs, and complaint dismissed, with costs.


Summaries of

Wakeman v. N.Y., N.H. H.R.R. Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 15, 1936
247 App. Div. 462 (N.Y. App. Div. 1936)
Case details for

Wakeman v. N.Y., N.H. H.R.R. Co.

Case Details

Full title:ETHEL S. WAKEMAN, Respondent, v. THE NEW YORK, NEW HAVEN AND HARTFORD…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: May 15, 1936

Citations

247 App. Div. 462 (N.Y. App. Div. 1936)
287 N.Y.S. 913