Decker v. Dreisen-Freedman, Inc., 2145.

• Decision Date: 25 July 1958
• Docket Number: No. 2145.,2145.
• Citation: 144 A.2d 108
• Parties: Kenneth M. DECKER and Constance M. Decker, Appellants, v. DREISEN-FREEDMAN, INC., a corporation, Dreisen and Freedman, Inc., a corporation, and Joseph Snyder, Appellees.
• Court: D.C. Court of Appeals

144 A.2d 108

Kenneth M. DECKER and Constance M. Decker, Appellants, v. DREISEN-FREEDMAN, INC., a corporation, Dreisen and Freedman, Inc., a corporation, and Joseph Snyder, Appellees.

No. 2145.

Municipal Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.

Argued April 21, 1958.

Decided July 25, 1958.

John Henry Fallon, Washington, D. C., with whom John B. Prebilich, Washington, D. C., was on the brief, for appellants.

H. Max Ammerman, Washington, D. C., for appellees.

Before ROVER, Chief Judge, and HOOD and QUINN, Associate Judges.

HOOD, Associate Judge.

Appellants instituted this suit against appellees seeking compensatory and punitive damages for alleged acts of trespass to realty. At the close of appellants' evidence the court directed a verdict in favor of both corporate defendants, and after all the evidence directed a verdict for the individual defendant Snyder. Appellants then moved for a new trial as to all parties and the court granted the motion as to Snyder and denied it as to the corporations. We dismissed an appeal as being premature when appellants sought review of the judgment in favor of the corporations prior to the new trial as to Snyder. See Decker v. Dreisen-Freedman, Inc., D.C. Mun.App., 124 A.2d 311. The new trial resulted in a directed verdict in favor of Snyder. The present appeal brings for review the directed verdicts in favor of the corporations on the first trial and the directed verdict in favor of Snyder on the new trial. There are many assignments of error but we deal first with the question of the direction of verdicts. From a review of the lengthy transcript the facts appear to be as follows. Appellants, husband and wife, were owners of a home located in Southeast Washington. Sometime in May 1952 construction of an apartment building was begun on adjoining property and in the course of such construction a series of trespasses were committed on appellants' property for which damages are now sought. That the acts were done has not been disputed by appellees. It is their contention that the evidence failed to show that they or any of them committed the acts of trespass. We shall treat the case against each appellee separately.

As to Joseph Snyder: The evidence indicated that Snyder was agent of the individuals Oscar Dreisen and Gerald Freedman; that he did not actively participate in the construction of the apartment building, but was at times seen about the site in an apparent supervisory capacity. The appellant Mrs. Decker testified that Snyder directed the workmen in their construction, but on cross-examination she admitted that the basis of her conclusion was merely his presence around the workmen. Apart from some conversations had by appellants with Snyder relative to certain of the alleged trespasses, there was no evidence to link him with the trespasses. From appellants' brief it appears that they would hold Snyder liable merely because he had entered upon appellants' property while engaging in the aforementioned conversations. We cannot agree that this admitted entry, coupled with the above-mentioned testimony, was sufficient evidence to require the submission of Snyder's liability to the jury.

As to Dreisen-Freedman, Inc.: There was offered in evidence from the official records...