Majority
p. 295Hannah Little, App’lt, v. Rose Wirth, Resp’t. (New York Superior Court, General Term, Filed December 29, 1893.)
Headnote
Landlord and tenant—Icy sidewalks.There is no duty on the part of the owner to the tenant to remove ice and snow from the sidewalk in front of the demised premises.
Appeal from an interlocutory judgment sustaining a demurrer.
The opinion of Me Adam, J., is as follows:
Applying the maxim, causa próxima non remota spectatur, the plaintiff is without a cause of action against the defendant, unless the latter, as owner of a tenement, is liable to the plaintiff, as her tenant, because she slipped upon the ice on the walk or stoop of
p. 296
her house; and there is no such liability. The authorities are uniform that there is nó duty on the part of an owner to a tenant or the public to remove from the steps or walk the ice and snow which naturally accumulates thereon. Woods v. Cotton Co., 134 Mass. 357 ; Watlcins v. Goodall, 138 Mass. 533 ; Purcell v. English, 86 Ind. 34 ; Shindelbeck v. Moon. 32 Ohio St. 264 . And in our own state, see Fuchs v. Schmidt, 8 Daly, 317 ; Moore v. Gadsden, 93 N, Y. 12 ; 87 N. Y. 84 ; Wenzlich v. McCotter, id. 122 ; City of Rochester v. Campbell, 123 N. Y. 405 ; 34 St. Rep. 77 . If the plaintiff has any remedy, she must seek it from the municipality for neglect. The demurrer must therefore be sustained, and judgment directed in favor of the defendant, with costs.
J. H. Far gis, for app’lt; Welch & Daniels, for resp’t.
The judgment appealed from was entered in due conformity with the order sustaining the demurrer, and the notice of appeal does not ask for a review of the order. But, independently of that, the judgment is right upon the merits, and should be affirmed upon the opinion rendered by the learned judge below. Judgment affirmed, with costs.
Cases cited
- Moore v. Gadsden 87 N. Y. 84 p. 296
- City of Rochester v. Campbell 123 N. Y. 405 p. 296