Schulhofer v. Mulhare

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Schulhofer v. Mulhare

50 Misc. 658, 99 N.Y.S. 489

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedMay 15, 1906

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 50 Misc. 658 (Schulhofer v. Mulhare) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Schulhofer v. Mulhare, 50 Misc. 658, 99 N.Y.S. 489 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1906).

Pincite

Opinion

Gildersleeve, J.

The action is for damages caused to' plaintiff’s premises by excavations on defendant’s adjoining premises. Judgment was given for defendant. Plaintiff appeals. We think the judgment should be sustained on the ground that it is shown, without contradiction, that the work of excavation was entirely in the hands of an independent contractor,' and that such contractor was a fit and competent person. Hexamer v. Webb, 101 N. Y. 377; Roemer v. Striker, 142 id. 134; Berg v. Parsons, 156 id. 109. If the work was negligently or improperly done by the contractor’s workmen, the contractor, and not defendant, was liable. The evidence does not warrant a finding that defendant or her husband, as her agent, interfered with the contractor’s method of doing the work, or attempted to direct or control his actions.

Davis and Clinch, JJ., concur.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

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

Gildersleeve, J.

The action is for damages caused to' plaintiff’s premises by excavations on defendant’s adjoining premises. Judgment was given for defendant. Plaintiff appeals. We think the judgment should be sustained on the ground that it is shown, without contradiction, that the work of excavation was entirely in the hands of an independent contractor,' and that such contractor was a fit and competent person. Hexamer v. Webb, 101 N. Y. 377; Roemer v. Striker, 142 id. 134; Berg v. Parsons, 156 id. 109. If the work was negligently or improperly done by the contractor’s workmen, the contractor, and not defendant, was liable. The evidence does not warrant a finding that defendant or her husband, as her agent, interfered with the contractor’s method of doing the work, or attempted to direct or control his actions.

Davis and Clinch, JJ., concur.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

50 Misc. 658, 99 N.Y.S. 489, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schulhofer-v-mulhare-nyappterm-1906.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack