Latronica v. Damergy

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Latronica v. Damergy

15 A.2d 763, 125 N.J.L. 323, 1940 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 65

CourtSupreme Court of New Jersey

DecidedOctober 18, 1940

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 15 A.2d 763 (Latronica v. Damergy) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of New Jersey primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Latronica v. Damergy, 15 A.2d 763, 125 N.J.L. 323, 1940 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 65 (N.J. 1940).

Pincite

Opinion

Bodine, J.

The parties to this suit were adjoining property owners. The defendants had employed a plumber to install on their premises a hot water heater attached to an oil burner. The hot water attachment, during the time the plumber was still checking the operation thereof, exploded because of lack of water damaging plaintiff’s premises for which the District Court awarded damages. This was error. There was no proof that the explosion was due to defendants’ negligence. Marshall v. Welwood, 38 N. J. L. 339.

There was no proof that the plumber was known to be an unskillful or improper person to do the work. Cuff v. Newark, New York Railroad Co., 35 N. J. L. 17; Sarno v. Gulf Refining Co., 99 Id. 340; affirmed, 102 Id. 223.

The plaintiff having failed to establish a right of recovery the judgment is reversed.

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

Bodine, J.

The parties to this suit were adjoining property owners. The defendants had employed a plumber to install on their premises a hot water heater attached to an oil burner. The hot water attachment, during the time the plumber was still checking the operation thereof, exploded because of lack of water damaging plaintiff’s premises for which the District Court awarded damages. This was error. There was no proof that the explosion was due to defendants’ negligence. Marshall v. Welwood, 38 N. J. L. 339.

There was no proof that the plumber was known to be an unskillful or improper person to do the work. Cuff v. Newark, New York Railroad Co., 35 N. J. L. 17; Sarno v. Gulf Refining Co., 99 Id. 340; affirmed, 102 Id. 223.

The plaintiff having failed to establish a right of recovery the judgment is reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

15 A.2d 763, 125 N.J.L. 323, 1940 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 65, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/latronica-v-damergy-nj-1940.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack