Drucker v. 693 Saratoga Avenue Corp.

245 A.D. 760
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided June 15, 1935·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Action by plaintiff, a tenant in defendant’s apartment house, to recover damages for burns she received in the bathroom of the apartment house. Judgment in her favor entered on the verdict of a jury. Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs, pursuant to the provision of section 106 of the Civil Practice Act. While we are of opinion that the failure of the defendant to equip its boiler with a safety valve should not have been left to the jury on the question of negligence, in view of the fact that there was no proof of requirement, in law or by custom, that the defendant should have provided such an equipment on the type of hot water system used by it, the error was harmless and in light of the circumstances it should be disregarded pursuant to section 106 of the Civil Practice Act. The doctrine of res ipsa loquitur clearly applied, as defendant concedes on this appeal. Not only did defendant fail to sustain the burden imposed upon it by that doctrine, but it proved affirmatively that the accident was due to the fact that the boiler was fired too heavily ■—■ a matter within its control and for which it was responsible. For the injuries received the verdict was not excessive. Present •—■ Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Scudder, Tompkins and Johnston, JJ.

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

Drucker v. 693 Saratoga Avenue Corp., 245 A.D. 760 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1935).

245 A.D. 760 (Drucker v. 693 Saratoga Avenue Corp.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Altman v. Central New York Building Corp.
201 Misc. 27 (City of New York Municipal Court, 1951)
Wolinetz v. William Treib, Inc.
269 A.D. 679 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1945)