Noziglia v. Tobiassen

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Noziglia v. Tobiassen

26 A.D.2d 915, 274 N.Y.S.2d 361, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3151

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedNovember 3, 1966

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 26 A.D.2d 915 (Noziglia v. Tobiassen) 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.

Bluebook

Noziglia v. Tobiassen, 26 A.D.2d 915, 274 N.Y.S.2d 361, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3151 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

— Judgment dismissing the complaint for failure to establish a prima facie case at the close of plaintiff’s case in a personal injuries negligence action unanimously reversed, on the law, and a new trial ordered on the issue of liability, with $50 costs and disbursements to abide the event. Plaintiff-appellant, a 67-year-old housewife, was injured when she fell down the stairway of a two-story, two-family dwelling house. She claims that her fall was caused by a defective stair tread and that her landlord, defendant-respondent, had notice of this condition. The testimony of plaintiff and her witnesses as well as photographs of the stair tread which were introduced at trial, are sufficient to raise a question for the jury as to whether the defect in the stair tread was sufficiently dangerous to impose liability upon the landlord (Nadel v. Fichten, 34 App. Div. 188 [Bartlett, J.]; Anno; Injury to Tenants—Stairways, 25 ALR 2d 364, 405-418). Furthermore, plaintiff’s knowledge of the defect and her attempts to repair the condition do not necessarily defeat her right to recovery in this action, and a jury could find that she exercised reasonable care in view of the known circumstances (see Perrone v. Berzon, 258 App. Div. 916; 34 FT. Y. Jur., Landlord and Tenants, § 465). Concur — Botein, P. J., Breitel, Stevens and Capozzoli, JJ.

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

— Judgment dismissing the complaint for failure to establish a prima facie case at the close of plaintiff’s case in a personal injuries negligence action unanimously reversed, on the law, and a new trial ordered on the issue of liability, with $50 costs and disbursements to abide the event. Plaintiff-appellant, a 67-year-old housewife, was injured when she fell down the stairway of a two-story, two-family dwelling house. She claims that her fall was caused by a defective stair tread and that her landlord, defendant-respondent, had notice of this condition. The testimony of plaintiff and her witnesses as well as photographs of the stair tread which were introduced at trial, are sufficient to raise a question for the jury as to whether the defect in the stair tread was sufficiently dangerous to impose liability upon the landlord (Nadel v. Fichten, 34 App. Div. 188 [Bartlett, J.]; Anno; Injury to Tenants—Stairways, 25 ALR 2d 364, 405-418). Furthermore, plaintiff’s knowledge of the defect and her attempts to repair the condition do not necessarily defeat her right to recovery in this action, and a jury could find that she exercised reasonable care in view of the known circumstances (see Perrone v. Berzon, 258 App. Div. 916; 34 FT. Y. Jur., Landlord and Tenants, § 465). Concur — Botein, P. J., Breitel, Stevens and Capozzoli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

26 A.D.2d 915, 274 N.Y.S.2d 361, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3151, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/noziglia-v-tobiassen-nyappdiv-1966.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack