Fasano v. Prudential Ins. Co. of Am.
| Decision Date | 26 February 1937 |
| Docket Number | No. 413.,413. |
| Citation | 190 A. 319 |
| Parties | FASANO v. PRUDENTIAL INS. CO. OF AMERICA. |
| Court | New Jersey Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court.
One who purchases a property, the sidewalk in front of which was so constructed that the surface of one of the blocks of concrete or stone was from five to eight inches lower than the surface of the sidewalk on either side of it, and which created a danger to pedestrians passing along the same, is chargeable with maintaining a nuisance in the public highway and is liable for injury resulting therefrom if he does nothing to remedy the condition for a period of years, in the absence of any evidence that the condition resulted from ordinary wear and tear or the ravages of the elements.
Appeal from Second District Court, Bergen County.
Action by Millie Fasano against the Prudential Insurance Company of America. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals.
Affirmed.
Argued October term, 1936, before TRENCHARD, BODINE, and HEHER, JJ.
Carey & Lane, of Jersey City, for appellant.
Landau & Mehler, of Hackensack (Victor A. Hart, of Hackensack, of counsel), for appellee.
This is an action by the plaintiff—a pedestrian—brought to recover damages for injury from the maintenance by the defendant of a nuisance in a public highway. It was tried before the judge, sitting without a jury, and resulted in a judgment in favor of the plaintiff. The defendant appeals.
On the appeal the defendant complains of (1) denial of motion for judgment in favor of the defendant, and (2) of the entry of judgment in favor of the plaintiff.
We find such complaints to be without merit.
The evidence in behalf of the plaintiff tended to show that on the 27th day of July, 1935, about 9:30 p. m., she tripped and fell on the sidewalk in front of the premises owned by the defendant and was injured; that this fall was caused by reason of the fact that the surface of a block of concrete or stone of the sidewalk on which plaintiff fell was from five to eight inches lower than the surface of the sidewalk on either side of it. Defendant admitted that it "owned the premises involved" at the time of the accident and for one year prior thereto, and had leased them to the present tenant. Plaintiff's witnesses testified that the condition as it was at the time of the accident had existed for five or six years prior to the accident.
The defendant offered no evidence, and there was no proof—even the slightest— that the condition resulted from...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Krug v. Wanner
...thereafter participated in maintaining. See Braelow v. Klein, 100 N.J.L. 156, 125 A. 103 (E. & A.1924); Fasano v. Prudential Insurance Co., 117 N.J.L. 539, 190 A. 319 (Sup.Ct.1937); McHugh v. Hawthorne B. & L. Ass'n, 118 N.J.L. 78, 191 A. 548 (Sup.Ct.1937); Wirth v. Peters, 36 N.J.Super. 17......
-
Mount v. Recka, A--159
...of a nuisance in the public street. Cf. Braelow v. Klein, 100 N.J.L. 156, 125 A. 103 (E. & A.1924); Fasano v. Prudential Insurance Co., 117 N.J.L. 539, 190 A. 319 (Sup.Ct.1937). And so also for the lack of due care in undertaking to repair a defective condition in the sidewalk for which he ......
-
Fitzwater v. Sunset Empire, Inc.
...126 N.J.L. 93, 18 A.2d 605 (1941), an iron strip placed in sidewalk and rising three inches over curbstone. In Fasano v. Prudential Ins. Co., 117 N.J.L. 539, 190 A. 319 (1937), one portion of the sidewalk was six inches higher than the remainder and had been so for several years.Also, in Ne......
-
Orlik v. De Almeida, A--134
...for its creation or continuance. Healy v. Sayre, 113 N.J.L. 308, 312, 174 A. 534 (E. & A. 1934); but cf. Fasano v. Prudential Insurance Co., 117 N.J.L. 539, 190 A. 319 (Sup.Ct.1937). As it is generally put, plaintiff has the burden of proving that the owner or his predecessor in title is re......