Boros v. Jernomi Construction Corp.

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Boros v. Jernomi Construction Corp.

139 Misc. 837, 249 N.Y.S. 414, 1931 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1234

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedApril 9, 1931

StatusPublished

This text of 139 Misc. 837 (Boros v. Jernomi Construction Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Boros v. Jernomi Construction Corp., 139 Misc. 837, 249 N.Y.S. 414, 1931 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1234 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1931).

Pincite

Opinions

Per Curiam.

The plaintiff showed by his proof that the tile in which the hot water control handle was fastened was loose and when he attempted to control the supply of water the handle, together with a piece of the tiling and some plaster, came out of the wall and fell on the floor, a small piece of the handle remaining in his hand; that plaintiff was severely scalded. This condition existed for about four weeks and notice had been given to the landlord, who failed to repair it. This proof constituted a prima facie case and it was error to dismiss the complaint.

Judgment reversed and new trial ordered, with thirty dollars costs to appellant to abide the event.

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

Per Curiam.

The plaintiff showed by his proof that the tile in which the hot water control handle was fastened was loose and when he attempted to control the supply of water the handle, together with a piece of the tiling and some plaster, came out of the wall and fell on the floor, a small piece of the handle remaining in his hand; that plaintiff was severely scalded. This condition existed for about four weeks and notice had been given to the landlord, who failed to repair it. This proof constituted a prima facie case and it was error to dismiss the complaint.

Judgment reversed and new trial ordered, with thirty dollars costs to appellant to abide the event.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

139 Misc. 837, 249 N.Y.S. 414, 1931 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1234, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/boros-v-jernomi-construction-corp-nyappterm-1931.