Herman v. Golden

• Decision Date: 29 June 1937
• Citation: 298 Mass. 9,9 N.E.2d 394
• Parties: DAVID HERMAN v. ABRAHAM E. GOLDEN.
• Court: United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court

298 Mass. 9

9 N.E.2d 394

DAVID HERMAN v. ABRAHAM E. GOLDEN.

Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Suffolk.

June 29, 1937

March 29, 1937.

Present: RUGG, C.

J., FIELD, DONAHUE LUMMUS, & QUA, JJ.

Negligence, Invited person, One owning or controlling real estate, Elevator.

If one who had agreed to become at a future date a tenant of a room on an upper floor of a building was in any way an invitee of the owner while in the building for his own purposes with the owner's permission his invitation did not extend to his groping in a dark hallway for the elevator upon which he had been taken to the upper floor by the owner on previous visits; and the owner was not liable to him for injuries sustained when he fell down the open elevator shaft.

TORT. Writ in the Superior Court dated June 10, 1931. The action was tried before F. T. Hammond, J., who, after the recording of a verdict for the plaintiff in the sum of $10,000 subject to leave reserved, ordered entered a verdict for the defendant. The plaintiff alleged exceptions.

The case was submitted on briefs. R. B. Coulter, for the plaintiff.

J. T. Connolly & W.

R. Donovan, for the defendant.

LUMMUS, J. The defendant's father kept a store, and the defendant owned a building next door, the rooms of which he let to various tenants for business purposes. The plaintiff desired to hire a place of business, and called at the store on Wednesday or Thursday, where he found the elder Golden, who was the defendant's father and agent. The latter showed the plaintiff a loft on the third floor. After another visit on Friday, an arrangement was made on Saturday by which the plaintiff was to pay rent from the first day of May, which was the following Friday, but in the meantime could go to the premises and do anything he wished there. A deposit was made on account of the first month's rent, but the evidence was conflicting as to whether he got a key. The balance of the rent was to be paid at the first of the month.

Entrance to the building was had through double swinging doors leading into a hallway five feet wide and nineteen feet long. As one walked down this hallway, he found on the right, about eight feet from the doors, an elevator lobby six feet wide and ten feet deep. Both the hallway and the elevator lobby were lighted by a single electric light in the hallway opposite the elevator lobby. This was controlled by a switch at the back of the hallway. The elevator, which was of the platform type used for freight, ran in a shaft between the elevator lobby and the front of the building. There was an entrance to the elevator from the front of the building, but that is immaterial. There was also an entrance to it from the elevator lobby. At this entrance there were heavy iron fire doors commonly left open. There was also a safety gate consisting of several bars with cross pieces. This gate worked in a groove of metal on one side and wood on the other, and was automatic at least to the extent that it was so designed that, if in good condition and working properly, it would descend whenever the elevator left the first floor landing, making a barrier across the entrance to the shaft. The elevator was operated by a rope which could be reached by a person standing in the elevator lobby close to the entrance to the elevator.

On the plaintiff's first visit with the elder Golden, the electric light in the hallway was on. The only light was from that electric light and from another in the elevator itself that Golden turned on. With the light on in the hallway the gate and the elevator platform were plainly seen. When the plaintiff and the elder Golden came down, ...