Katz v. Goldring
This text of 237 A.D. 824 (Katz v. Goldring) 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.
Opinion
Judgment and order reversed on the law and a new trial granted, costs to appellant to abide the event. We are of opinion that the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur applies, that actual or constructive notice need not be proved, the defect being apparently structural in its nature; and that the court erred in its charge at folios 160-163 in that respect and in failing to charge as requested at folio 170. (See Storms v. Lane, 223 App. Div. 79; Griffen v. Manice, 166 N. Y. 188; Marceau v. Rutland R. R. Co., 211 id. 203.) Lazansky, P. J., Tompkins and Davis, JJ., concur; Kapper and Seudder, JJ., dissent and vote to affirm.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
237 A.D. 824, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/katz-v-goldring-nyappdiv-1932.