TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Kaufman v. Young

Kaufman v. Young, 157 N.Y.S. 778 (1916)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · State Appellate Courts
Decided
March 13, 1916
Judges
Lehman
Citations
157 N.Y.S. 778
Headnotes
Landlord and Tenant @=>164(1)—Personal Injury to Tenant—Negligence. The owner of a tenement house, whose employs washed slate steps at 6 o’clock on Sunday morning and left them wet and slippery, but who used no oil in the cleaning and permitted no water to collect in puddles, was not negligent, and hence was not liable to a tenant injured by slipping on the steps. [Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Landlord and Tenant, Cent. Dig. §§ 630, 634; Dec. Dig. @=>164(1).] ^cs>For other cases see same topic & KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests & Indexes
Summary
Appeal from Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, Second District. Action by Estelle Kaufman, an infant, by Abraham Kaufman, her guardian ad litem, against Louis Young. From a judgment dismissing the complaint on the merits at the close of the case, plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Lehman

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

LEHMAN, J.

The plaintiff testified that the stairs were “oily and slippery.” condition is that an hour before the accident, at about 6 o’clock, an employé of the defendant washed down the steps, as she did on every other Sunday morning, and that she left the steps “wet and slippery.” There is no testimony that she used any oil in the cleaning, or that ' she permitted any water or other substance to collect in puddles; on j the contrary, it affirmatively appears that the steps were of slate, and i that the employé washed them down with a “wet rag.”

I know of no method by which slate steps can be washed without leaving them wet. The only question, therefore, that the trial justice could have left to the jury, is whether it is negligent for the owner of a tenement house to wash slate steps at 6 o’clock each Sunday morning. I do not think that, under any view of what constitutes •reasonable care, such an act could be considered as negligent, and the trial justice properly refused to leave the question to the jury.

Judgment affirmed, with $25 costs. All concur.

How later courts describe this case

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

1924: 11927: 11928: 11945: 119242026peak 1924 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Kerstein v. Goodman130 Misc. 714 (1927)
  2. De Baca v. Kahn161 P.2d 630 (N.M. 1945)
  3. Mona v. Erion223 A.D. 526 (1928)
  4. Beech v. Weber123 Misc. 926 (1924)

Most recent

  1. De Baca v. Kahn161 P.2d 630 (N.M. 1945)
  2. Mona v. Erion223 A.D. 526 (1928)
  3. Kerstein v. Goodman130 Misc. 714 (1927)
  4. Beech v. Weber123 Misc. 926 (1924)

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