Pearlman v. Wahlig & Sonsin Co. — 137 N.Y.S. 876

Majority

p. 876

PEARLMAN v. WAHLIG & SONSIN CO.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Term-, First Department.

November 8, 1912.),

Headnote

Landlord and Tenant (§ 169*)—Injuries—Defective Condition of Premises.

Proof that there was ice and snow on the sidewalk in front of an apartment house, and that a tenant, upon leaving the house, slipped upon the ice and was injured, and that she afterwards accused the janitor of having thrown soapy water on the sidewalk, does not establish any cause of action.

[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Landlord and Tenant, Cent. Dig. §§ 644-646, 664-667, 681-684; Dec. Dig. § 169.*]

*For other cases see same topic & § number in Dec. & Am. Digs. 1907 to date. & Rep'r Indexes

Appeal from Municipal Court, Borough of the Bronx, Second District.

Action by Florence Pearlman against the Wahlig & Sonsin Company. From a judgment of the Municipal Court, rendered in favor of plaintiff, defendant appeals. Reversed, and complaint dismissed, with costs, and without prejudice to a new action.

Argued October "term, 1912, before SEABURY, GUY, and BI-JUR, JJ.

Carl Schurz Petrasch, of New York City (Sidney L. Teven and Otto J. Christ, both of New York City, of counsel), for appellant.

Joseph B. Altschul, for respondent.

This is an action to recover for personal injuries alleged to have been caused by the negligence of the defendant. The defendant is the owner of the premises No. 1199 Fulton avenue, in the borough of the Bronx, and the plaintiff, on January 12, 1912, was a tenant of an apartment in those premises. Upon leaving the house on the day in question, the plaintiff slipped upon the ice in front of the premises, and fell, and sustained the injuries for which she seeks to recover in this action.

The fact that the plaintiff slipped and fell on ice, and that there were snow and ice on the sidewalk, is all that the plaintiff proved, except that she was allowed to testify to a conversation which she had with the janitor of the premises several days after the accident, in which she accused the janitor of having thrown soapy water on the sidewalk. It is apparent from this recital that this evidence furnishes no support for a judgment against the defendant. The plaintiff failed to prove any cause of action, and the complaint should have been dismissed.

Judgment reversed, with costs, and complaint dismissed, with costs, without prejudice to a new action. All concur.