TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Mevorah v. Garyn

Stuart Mevorah, an Infant, by His Father and Natural Guardian, Sol Mevorah v. Steve Garyn

Mevorah v. Garyn, 324 N.E.2d 547 (N.Y. 1974)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
New York Court of Appeals · State Highest Courts
Decided
December 20, 1974
Judges
Wachtler
Citations
324 N.E.2d 54735 N.Y.2d 934365 N.Y.S.2d 1651974 N.Y. LEXIS 1089

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Order reversed, with costs in all courts, and the interlocutory judgment of Supreme Court, Nassau County, reinstated on the dissenting memorandum by Mr. Justice Hesby J. Latham at the Appellate Division.

Concur: Chief Judge Beeitel and Judges Jases, Gabbielli, Joses and Stevess. Judge Wachtleb concurs in result in the following opinion. Taking no part: Judge Rabis.

Concurrence — Wachtler

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Wachtler, J.

(concurring). I concur in reversal but not for the reasons adopted by the majority. In my view every defendant, including a property owner, should be held to the standard of reasonable conduct and, as I recently stated in my concur-, ring opinion in Martinez v. Kaufman-Kane Realty Co. (34 N Y 2d 819), I can see no reason for perpetuating exceptions based on the archaic distinction between trespassers, licensees and invitees. Nor can I perceive any benefit in meeting the prob *937 lem halfway by expanding the exceptions to the exceptions as the majority here, and in Martines, seeks to do.

With the legal relics out of the case the only issue as I see it is whether the plaintiff was injured because the defendants failed to exercise reasonable care in the management of their property. Considering the evidence, noted in the majority opinion, I believe the jury could properly have found that they did not act reasonably under the circumstances.

Accordingly, I concur in the reversal.

Order reversed, etc.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1975: 11976: 219752026peak 1976 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Basso v. Miller352 N.E.2d 868 (N.Y. 1976)
  2. Barker v. Parnossa, Inc.352 N.E.2d 880 (N.Y. 1976) · Concurrence
  3. Parish v. Henneberry Road Farms, Inc.49 A.D.2d 675 (1975)

Most recent

  1. Barker v. Parnossa, Inc.352 N.E.2d 880 (N.Y. 1976) · Concurrence
  2. Basso v. Miller352 N.E.2d 868 (N.Y. 1976)
  3. Parish v. Henneberry Road Farms, Inc.49 A.D.2d 675 (1975)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list