Healy v. Burke

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Healy v. Burke

36 Misc. 792, 74 N.Y.S. 1131

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedDecember 15, 1901

StatusPublished

This text of 36 Misc. 792 (Healy v. Burke) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Healy v. Burke, 36 Misc. 792, 74 N.Y.S. 1131 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1901).

Pincite

Opinion

McAdam, P. J.

In view of the rule that at the close of the. plaintiff’s case he is entitled to all the inferences in his favor legitimately deducible from the proof (Baylies Trial Pr. [2d ed.] 309), we think that on the question in issue — defendant’s negligence, and plaintiff’s freedom from contributory negligence — the plaintiff proved a prima facie case, and that the complaint should not have been dismissed.

The opinion of the court below seems to correctly note the rule applicable to scaffolds since the enactment of the Labor Law (Laws [793]*793of 1897, chap. 415), which extends the common-law liability. Stewart v. Ferguson, 34 App. Div. 515, 52 id. 317; affd., 164 N. Y. 553; Rettig v. Fifth Ave. Transportation Company, 6 Misc. Rep. 328; affd., 144 N. Y. 750.

The order appealed from will therefore be affirmed, with costs. As the defendant has, in the event of affirmance of the order of the General Term, stipulated for judgment absolute, the cause is remitted to the court below for assessment of the plaintiff’s damages.

MacLean and Scott, JJ., concur.

Order affirmed, with costs.

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