Rothman v. Wallabout Holding Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Rothman v. Wallabout Holding Corp.

240 A.D. 988

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

DecidedDecember 15, 1933

StatusPublished

This text of 240 A.D. 988 (Rothman v. Wallabout Holding Corp.) 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

Rothman v. Wallabout Holding Corp., 240 A.D. 988 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1933).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment reversed on the law and a new trial granted, with costs to appellant to abide the event. There were questions of fact to be submitted to the -jury. It was for the jury to determine if plaintiff’s method of doing the work was negligent or not, and whether, under the circumstances, defendant was negligent in permitting the window frame to be defective, and should have anticipated that plaintiff would use it as he did. Lazansky, P. J., Young, Kapper and Carswell, JJ., concur; Davis, J., dissents and votes to affirm.

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

Judgment reversed on the law and a new trial granted, with costs to appellant to abide the event. There were questions of fact to be submitted to the -jury. It was for the jury to determine if plaintiff’s method of doing the work was negligent or not, and whether, under the circumstances, defendant was negligent in permitting the window frame to be defective, and should have anticipated that plaintiff would use it as he did. Lazansky, P. J., Young, Kapper and Carswell, JJ., concur; Davis, J., dissents and votes to affirm.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

240 A.D. 988, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rothman-v-wallabout-holding-corp-nyappdiv-1933.