Kenny v. Essman

86 N.E.2d 106, 299 N.Y. 583, 1949 N.Y. LEXIS 1044
New York Court of Appeals·Decided April 14, 1949·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

*585 Judgments modified by reversing so much thereof as dismissed the second cause of action and by granting a new trial thereof, and as so modified, affirmed, with costs to abide the event. In our view, the evidence presented in connection with the second cause of action, predicated upon the defendants’ “ negligence ” in maintaining the floor of their butcher shop “in a slippery and dangerous condition ”, was sufficient to require submission of that cause of action to the jury. No opinion.

Concur: Loughran, Ch. J., Lewis, Desmond, Fuld and Bromley, JJ. Conway, J., concurs as to the second cause of action but dissents and votes to reverse as to the first cause of action and votes to grant a new trial as to that also on the opinion of Mr. Justice Dore in the Appellate Division. Dye, J., dissents and votes to affirm.

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

Kenny v. Essman, 86 N.E.2d 106, 299 N.Y. 583, 1949 N.Y. LEXIS 1044 (N.Y. 1949).

86 N.E.2d 106 (Kenny v. Essman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related