Ibbeken v. City of New York

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Ibbeken v. City of New York

94 N.Y.S. 568

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York·Decided June 22, 1905·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

SCOTT, P. J.

In my opinion, the defect in the sidewalk was not of sufficient gravity to justify a careful and prudent man in reasonably anticipating danger from its existence. It is only against danger which can or ought to be thus anticipated that the municipality is bound to guard. Beltz v. City of Yonkers, 148 N. Y. 67, 42 N. E. 401; Hamilton v. City of Buffalo, 173 N. Y. 72, 65 N. E. 944. Nor was it shown that the defect, such as it was, had existed long enough to reasonably charge the city with notice.

Judgments reversed and new trials granted, with costs to appellant to abide the event. All concur.

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

SCOTT, P. J.

In my opinion, the defect in the sidewalk was not of sufficient gravity to justify a careful and prudent man in reasonably anticipating danger from its existence. It is only against danger which can or ought to be thus anticipated that the municipality is bound to guard. Beltz v. City of Yonkers, 148 N. Y. 67, 42 N. E. 401; Hamilton v. City of Buffalo, 173 N. Y. 72, 65 N. E. 944. Nor was it shown that the defect, such as it was, had existed long enough to reasonably charge the city with notice.

Judgments reversed and new trials granted, with costs to appellant to abide the event. All concur.

Ibbeken v. City of New York, 94 N.Y.S. 568 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1905).

Pincite

94 N.Y.S. 568 (Ibbeken v. City of New York) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related