Gilcher v. McNulty Bros. Realty Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Gilcher v. McNulty Bros. Realty Co.

269 A.D. 844, 55 N.Y.S.2d 546, 1945 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4205

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

DecidedJune 4, 1945

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 269 A.D. 844 (Gilcher v. McNulty Bros. Realty Co.) 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

Gilcher v. McNulty Bros. Realty Co., 269 A.D. 844, 55 N.Y.S.2d 546, 1945 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4205 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1945).

Pincite

Opinion

Action to recover damages for personal injuries sustained when plaintiff, while visiting a tenant in appellant’s apartment house, tripped and fell in an alleyway leading from the public sidewalk to a side entrance of the house. Judgment of the City Court of Mount Vernon, entered on the verdict of a jury, affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Close, P. J., Johnston, Adel and Aldrich, JJ., concur; Hagarty, J., dissents, votes to reverse the judgment on the law, and to dismiss the complaint, with the following memorandum: The alleyway involved was not within the province of the Multiple Dwelling Law, as the1 court charged, and, therefore, there was no statutory duty to illuminate it. In my opinion, the step of three inches from the floor of the alleyway to the public sidewalk did not constitute a dangerous or defective condition requiring the appellant to place a-light there in discharge of its common-law duty. [See post, p. 901.]

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

Action to recover damages for personal injuries sustained when plaintiff, while visiting a tenant in appellant’s apartment house, tripped and fell in an alleyway leading from the public sidewalk to a side entrance of the house. Judgment of the City Court of Mount Vernon, entered on the verdict of a jury, affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Close, P. J., Johnston, Adel and Aldrich, JJ., concur; Hagarty, J., dissents, votes to reverse the judgment on the law, and to dismiss the complaint, with the following memorandum: The alleyway involved was not within the province of the Multiple Dwelling Law, as the1 court charged, and, therefore, there was no statutory duty to illuminate it. In my opinion, the step of three inches from the floor of the alleyway to the public sidewalk did not constitute a dangerous or defective condition requiring the appellant to place a-light there in discharge of its common-law duty. [See post, p. 901.]

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

269 A.D. 844, 55 N.Y.S.2d 546, 1945 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4205, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gilcher-v-mcnulty-bros-realty-co-nyappdiv-1945.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack