Ryer v. Sheroak Realty Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Ryer v. Sheroak Realty Co.

253 A.D. 924, 2 N.Y.S.2d 348, 1938 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9284

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

DecidedFebruary 28, 1938

StatusPublished

This text of 253 A.D. 924 (Ryer v. Sheroak Realty Co.) 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

Ryer v. Sheroak Realty Co., 253 A.D. 924, 2 N.Y.S.2d 348, 1938 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9284 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1938).

Pincite

Opinion

Action by plaintiff Marian Ryer to recover damages for personal injuries caused by striking her head against an overhanging beam in a passageway in the basement of defendant’s apartment house, and action by her husband for expenses and loss of services.. Judgment of the City Court of Mount Vernon in favor of plaintiffs and order denying motion to set aside the verdict and for a new trial reversed on the law and a new trial ordered, costs to appellant to abide the event. It was error to admit, over defendant’s objection, the testimony that an electric light was present and the side walls of the passageway in the basement whitewashed; conditions that did not exist at the time of the accident. (Cahill v. Kleinberg, 233 N. Y. 255.) The photographic exhibits, in so far as they fairly represent the surrounding conditions at the time of the accident, are admissible. The changes in condition should not be shown. They are not evidence of negligence. Lazansky, P. J., Davis, Johnston, Adel and Taylor, JJ., concur.

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

Action by plaintiff Marian Ryer to recover damages for personal injuries caused by striking her head against an overhanging beam in a passageway in the basement of defendant’s apartment house, and action by her husband for expenses and loss of services.. Judgment of the City Court of Mount Vernon in favor of plaintiffs and order denying motion to set aside the verdict and for a new trial reversed on the law and a new trial ordered, costs to appellant to abide the event. It was error to admit, over defendant’s objection, the testimony that an electric light was present and the side walls of the passageway in the basement whitewashed; conditions that did not exist at the time of the accident. (Cahill v. Kleinberg, 233 N. Y. 255.) The photographic exhibits, in so far as they fairly represent the surrounding conditions at the time of the accident, are admissible. The changes in condition should not be shown. They are not evidence of negligence. Lazansky, P. J., Davis, Johnston, Adel and Taylor, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

253 A.D. 924, 2 N.Y.S.2d 348, 1938 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9284, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ryer-v-sheroak-realty-co-nyappdiv-1938.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack