Carroll v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.

258 A.D. 937, 16 N.Y.S.2d 608, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7646
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 27, 1939·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Judgment affirmed, with costs. Memorandum: The evidence does not show that the basket over which plaintiff tripped was placed in the aisle by an employee of defendant. The basket was not in the aisle long enough to charge the defendant with notice thereof. The aisles in defendant’s store were not so narrow as to be dangerous upon use by customers and plaintiff’s fall was not caused by the narrowness of such aisles. It was not shown that defendant was negligent. (Greene v. Sibley, Lindsay & Curr Co., 257 N. Y. 190.) All concur. (The judgment dismisses the complaint in a negligence action.) Present — Sears, P. J., Crosby, Lewis, Cunningham and Taylor, JJ.

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

Carroll v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co., 258 A.D. 937, 16 N.Y.S.2d 608, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7646 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1939).

258 A.D. 937 (Carroll v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Safran v. Man-Dell Stores, Inc.
106 A.D.2d 560 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1984)
McDonough v. Newmans Cloak & Suit Co.
77 N.W.2d 59 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1956)