Granatelli v. Kalmanowitz

268 A.D. 90, 48 N.Y.S.2d 600, 1944 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3115

This text of 268 A.D. 90 (Granatelli v. Kalmanowitz) 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
Granatelli v. Kalmanowitz, 268 A.D. 90, 48 N.Y.S.2d 600, 1944 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3115 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1944).

Opinions

Per Curiam.

The record is devoid of evidence to indicate that the superintendent of the apartment house acted by order of or with the knowledge of defendant.

We think,too, there is no evidence from which the jury could find that the superintendent was acting within the scope of his authority. (Muller v. Hillenbrand, 227 N. Y. 448.) The act was not done on defendant’s premises or even on the sidewalk in front of it but on the roadway over which neither defendant nor the superintendent had jurisdiction or authority.

The judgment appealed from should be affirmed, with costs.

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

Related

Muller v. . Hillenbrand
125 N.E. 808 (New York Court of Appeals, 1920)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
268 A.D. 90, 48 N.Y.S.2d 600, 1944 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3115, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/granatelli-v-kalmanowitz-nyappdiv-1944.