Folley v. United Bldg. & Loan Ass'n of Hackensack
| Decision Date | 06 April 1935 |
| Docket Number | Nos. 418, 419.,s. 418, 419. |
| Citation | 178 A. 95 |
| Parties | FOLLEY v. UNITED BUILDING & LOAN ASS'N OF HACKENSACK (two cases). |
| Court | New Jersey Supreme Court |
Appeal from Third District Court, Bergen County.
Actions by Sadie J. Folley and her husband, George Folley, respectively, against the United Building & Loan Association of Hackensack. Judgments for plaintiffs, and defendant appeals.
Reversed.
Argued January term, 1935, before LLOYD, CASE, and DONGES, JJ.
James A. Major, of Hackensack, for respondents.
Harry E. Walburg, of Newark, for appellant.
Sadie J. Polley sues for personal injuries and her husband, George Folley, for damages per quod. Each state of demand alleges that the defendant is the owner of certain dwelling house premises and that on or about February 12, 1934, the parties plaintiff, as tenants of the premises, took up their occupancy by virtue of a certain lease made by the defendant with Mrs. Folley, that the defendant, as landlord, was then under the duty of using due and proper care to keep and maintain the stairways in a safe and proper condition, that defendant failed therein, and that, consequently, on the said February 12, 1934, Mrs. Folley fell and was injured in using the rear stairway. At the close of plaintiffs' case defendant moved and was denied a nonsuit, to which ruling exception was taken. At the close of the entire case defendant moved for a direction of verdict upon which decision was reserved. The ruling on the lastmentioned motion and the judgment itself do not appear in the printed state of the case except as the clerk's docket discloses a judgment for the plaintiff in the sum of §200. However, the issue disclosed by the briefs is whether the defendant was entitled to succeed as on a motion for judgment, and this, in turn, depends upon whether or not there was evidence to establish Mrs. Folley as an invitee rather than as a trespasser or a licensee.
On January 22, 1934, Mrs. Folley and the defendant entered into a written lease for the premises to begin on February 15, 1934, and to end on May 1, 1935. Mrs. Folley testified that there was an oral undertaking by the defendant that it would make necessary repairs, "would clean and fix everything there was to be done and have the house in good order." Assuming that that oral undertaking made by a representative of the defendant was binding upon the defendant, it nevertheless remains that the Folleys went into the premises on the 12th of February, three days...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Board of Com'rs of Cass County v. Nevitt
...failed to state a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress--wife's suit barred); Folley v. United Building & Loan Ass'n of Hackensack, (1935) 13 N.J.Misc. 293, 178 A. 95 (landowner had no duty to wife, injured while trespassing--husband's suit Where, however, an injured husban......
-
Lansburgh & Bro. v. Clark
...515, 105 N.E. 379, 51 L.R.A., N.S., 1152; Chicago, B. & Q. R. Co. v. Honey, 8 Cir., 63 F. 39, 26 L.R.A. 42; Folley v. United B. & L. Association, 178 A. 95, 13 N.J.Misc. 293; Anderson v. Third Avenue R. Co., 9 Daly, N.Y., 487; Brown v. Missouri Pac. R. Co., 96 Mo.App. 164, 70 S.W. 527; Lind......
-
Folley v. United Bldg. & Loan Ass'n of Hackensack
...the lease or to deduce a legal obligation upon the defendant to have the repairs made before the beginning of the lease term." 178 A. 95, 96, 13 N.J. Misc. 293. The lease did not impose upon the landlord the obligation to make repairs. Plaintiffs rely upon an asserted oral undertaking by th......
-
Fekete v. Schipler
...63 N.J.L. 188, 42 A. 838 (Sup.Ct.1899); Rossman v. Newbon, 112 N.J.L. 261, 170 A. 230 (E. & A. 1934); Folley v. United B. & L. Assn., 13 N.J.Misc. 293, 178 A. 95 (Sup.Ct.1935). On behalf of the parent claimant herein it is argued that the recent decision of our Supreme Court in Orr v. Orr, ......