Ecker v. Monae-Lesser

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Ecker v. Monae-Lesser

258 A.D. 812, 15 N.Y.S.2d 972, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7061

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

DecidedNovember 27, 1939

StatusPublished

This text of 258 A.D. 812 (Ecker v. Monae-Lesser) 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

Ecker v. Monae-Lesser, 258 A.D. 812, 15 N.Y.S.2d 972, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7061 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1939).

Pincite

Opinion

Plaintiff, a chauffeur in the employ of defendants, was injured when he fell on the floor of the dining room in defendants’ home. The floor had been waxed. The proof shows the wax was applied one-quarter of an inch thick and was not dry at the time of the accident. Plaintiff’s complaint sets forth two causes of action: one, the failure to provide workmen’s compensation insurance, and the other, negligence. Plaintiff was nonsuited. In our opinion the plaintiff established a prima facie case on the second cause of action, and whether he was guilty of contributory negligence was for the jury to determine. Judgment reversed on the law and a new trial granted, with costs to appellant to abide the event. Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Carswell, Johnston and Close, JJ., concur.

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

Plaintiff, a chauffeur in the employ of defendants, was injured when he fell on the floor of the dining room in defendants’ home. The floor had been waxed. The proof shows the wax was applied one-quarter of an inch thick and was not dry at the time of the accident. Plaintiff’s complaint sets forth two causes of action: one, the failure to provide workmen’s compensation insurance, and the other, negligence. Plaintiff was nonsuited. In our opinion the plaintiff established a prima facie case on the second cause of action, and whether he was guilty of contributory negligence was for the jury to determine. Judgment reversed on the law and a new trial granted, with costs to appellant to abide the event. Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Carswell, Johnston and Close, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

258 A.D. 812, 15 N.Y.S.2d 972, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7061, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ecker-v-monae-lesser-nyappdiv-1939.