Prokopowicz v. 11 West 42nd Street, Inc.

New York Court of Appeals

Prokopowicz v. 11 West 42nd Street, Inc.

45 N.E.2d 906, 289 N.Y. 350, 1942 N.Y. LEXIS 959

New York Court of Appeals·Decided December 3, 1942·Published

Opinion

*352 Per Curiam.

Even without direct proof that the installation of an additional safety device on electrical elevators was customary in 1926, a question of fact is presented whether the defendant Otis Elevator Company acted negligently in failing to install such device under the circumstances shown by the evidence produced by the plaintiff.

The judgments should be reversed and a new trial granted, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.

Lehman, Ch. J., Loughran, Finch, Rippey, Lewis, Conway and Desmond, JJ., concur.

Judgments reversed.

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

*352 Per Curiam.

Even without direct proof that the installation of an additional safety device on electrical elevators was customary in 1926, a question of fact is presented whether the defendant Otis Elevator Company acted negligently in failing to install such device under the circumstances shown by the evidence produced by the plaintiff.

The judgments should be reversed and a new trial granted, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.

Lehman, Ch. J., Loughran, Finch, Rippey, Lewis, Conway and Desmond, JJ., concur.

Judgments reversed.

Prokopowicz v. 11 West 42nd Street, Inc., 45 N.E.2d 906, 289 N.Y. 350, 1942 N.Y. LEXIS 959 (N.Y. 1942).

Pincite

45 N.E.2d 906 (Prokopowicz v. 11 West 42nd Street, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.