Arnold v. Egner

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Arnold v. Egner

3 A.D.2d 727, 159 N.Y.S.2d 891, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6396

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedFebruary 25, 1957

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 3 A.D.2d 727 (Arnold v. Egner) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Arnold v. Egner, 3 A.D.2d 727, 159 N.Y.S.2d 891, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6396 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1957).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the appeal is from a judgment entered on a dismissal of the complaint at the close of plaintiff’s case. Judgment reversed and a new trial granted, with costs to appellant to abide the event. While attempting to descend a flight of steps into a portion of a building owned by respondents and maintained by them for the sale of poultry and poultry products to the public, appellant, who had accompanied his wife to make a purchase therein, was struck in the back by a screen door and knocked down the steps, sustaining the injuries complained of. The door was operated by a two-pound weight attached to a rope which passed through a pulley. The door opened outward above a concrete sill five or six inches wide. The [728]*728steps led directly down from the sill without a landing platform. Whether the form of construction of the door and the steps was defective and whether they were negligently maintained were questions of fact for the jury. Nolan, P. J., Wenzel, Ughetta, Hallinan and Kleinfeld, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the appeal is from a judgment entered on a dismissal of the complaint at the close of plaintiff’s case. Judgment reversed and a new trial granted, with costs to appellant to abide the event. While attempting to descend a flight of steps into a portion of a building owned by respondents and maintained by them for the sale of poultry and poultry products to the public, appellant, who had accompanied his wife to make a purchase therein, was struck in the back by a screen door and knocked down the steps, sustaining the injuries complained of. The door was operated by a two-pound weight attached to a rope which passed through a pulley. The door opened outward above a concrete sill five or six inches wide. The [728]*728steps led directly down from the sill without a landing platform. Whether the form of construction of the door and the steps was defective and whether they were negligently maintained were questions of fact for the jury. Nolan, P. J., Wenzel, Ughetta, Hallinan and Kleinfeld, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

3 A.D.2d 727, 159 N.Y.S.2d 891, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6396, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/arnold-v-egner-nyappdiv-1957.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack