Boettcher v. Dowling
| Decision Date | 31 January 1936 |
| Citation | 200 N.E. 316,270 N.Y. 557 |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
| Parties | Antonie BOETTCHER, Appellant, v. Victor J. DOWLING et al., as Receivers of the Interborough Rapid Transit Company, Respondents. |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (243 App.Div. 397, 277 N.Y.S. 228), entered March 27, 1935, reversing upon questions of law a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict directed by the court at a Trial Term without a jury and directing a dismissal of the complaint, in an action to recover for personal injuries alleged to have been sustained by the plaintiff through the negligence of defendants. The plaintiff testified that on April 29, 1933, while proceeding along a tunnel at the subway railroad station operated by defendants at Ninety-Sixth street and Broadway, in the borough of Manhattan, on her way to one of the railroad platforms, the floor was wet for about three feet from each wall; that she walked in the center of the tunnel floor, which was dry, until she came to the entrance of the stairway to the uptown platform; that the floor in front of this stairway was wet and muddy; and that, as she attempted to reach the stairway, her foot slipped in the mud, causing her to fall and to sustain the injuries complained of. There was also evidence that a porter, employed by defendants, had, about an hour before the accident, washed down the side walls of the tunnel with a solution of water and some gritty substance.
Robert G. Sheller and Desmond T. Barry, both of New York City, for appellant.
James Hess and James L. Quackenbush, both of New York City, for respondents.
Judgment affirmed, with costs.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Cruz v. New York City Transit Authority
...368, affd. 64 N.Y.2d 670, 485 N.Y.S.2d 252, 474 N.E.2d 612; Boettcher v. Dowling, 243 App.Div. 397, 277 N.Y.S.2d 228, affd. 270 N.Y. 557, 200 N.E. 316; 17 NY Jur 2d, Carriers, §§ 414, The existence of such a duty presents a question of law for the courts, based upon the following considerat......
-
Lewis v. Metropolitan Transp. Authority
...v. New York Central Railroad Co., 228 App.Div. 50, 239 N.Y.S. 90; Boettcher v. Dowling, 243 App.Div. 397, 277 N.Y.S. 228, aff'd 270 N.Y. 557, 200 N.E. 316; 17 N.Y.Jur.2d, Carriers, §§ 414, 417). Thus, almost a century ago, in Kelly v. Manhattan R. Co., supra, the Court of Appeals distinguis......
-
Amodeo v. New York City Transit Authority
...under the prevailing weather conditions, to reduce the danger (Boettcher v. Dowling, 243 App.Div. 397, 277 N.Y.S. 228, affirmed 270 N.Y. 557, 200 N.E. 316; Beltz v. Buffalo, Rochester and Pittsburgh Ry. Co., 222 N.Y. 433, 119 N.E. 81; Cummins v. City of New York, 281 App.Div. 684, 117 N.Y.S......
- Eager v. New York Rapid Transit Corp.