Holgerson v. South 45th Street Garage, Inc.
| Decision Date | 28 February 1963 |
| Citation | 239 N.Y.S.2d 134,12 N.Y.2d 1011 |
| Parties | , 189 N.E.2d 628 John H. HOLGERSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SOUTH 45TH STREET GARAGE, INC., Defendant-Respondent and Third-Party Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MARCATO ELEVATOR COMPANY, Inc., Third-Party Defendant-Respondent. |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, 16 A.D.2d 255, 227 N.Y.S.2d 195.
Elevator maintenance man brought action against owner of garage building for injuries sustained when maintenance man fell through screen roof on top of freight elevator. The owner of the building filed a third-party complaint against the former employer of the maintenance man.
The Supreme Court, Bronx County, Trial Term, Julius J. Gans, J., entered a judgment dismissing the complaint and the third-party complaint at the end of the maintenance man's case, and the maintenance man and the owner of the building appealed.
The Appellate Division, Breitel, J., affirmed the judgment and held that scrren roof on top of elevator and plank lying across the screen were not a part of the place for the maintenance man to work and that the maintenance man was guilty of contributory negligence. Bastow, J., and Botein, P. J., dissented.
The maintenance man and the owner of the building appealed to the Court of Appeals. The maintenance man contended in the Court of Appeals that there was a question of fact as to whether the owner of the building negligently breached duty to maintain reasonably safe screen roof on elevator, and that question whether the maintenance man was guilty of contributory negligence was a question of fact. The owner of the building contended in the Court of Appeals that the complaint was properly dismissed, that maintenance man was contributorily negligent as a matter of law, and that if a new trial should be ordered, that part of the judgment dismissing the third-party complaint should also be reversed and new trial ordered.
Benjamin Goldstein, New York City (Benjamin H. Siff, New York City, of counsel), for plaintiff-appellant.
Paul O. Hastings, New York City (Lester D. Cook, Rye, of counsel), for defendant-respondent and third-party plaintiff-appellant South 45th Street Garage, Inc.
Bernard Helfenstein, Brooklyn (Frederick Mandel, Brooklyn, of counsel), for third-party defendant-respondent Marcato Elevator Co.
Judgment affirmed, with costs to defendant garage against plaintiff and to defendant elevator company against defendant garage.
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
O'Connor v. G & R Packing Co.
...N.Y.2d 769, 234 N.Y.S.2d 718, 186 N.E.2d 566; Holgerson v. South 45th St. Garage, 16 A.D.2d 255, 227 N.Y.S.2d 195, affd. 12 N.Y.2d 1011, 239 N.Y.S.2d 134, 189 N.E.2d 628; Gugliemini v. Conigliaro, 35 A.D.2d 524, 313 N.Y.S.2d 189, affd. 29 N.Y.2d 930, 329 N.Y.S.2d 321, 280 N.E.2d 95; Halstea......
-
Long v. Forest-Fehlhaber, Joint Venture, FOREST-FEHLHABE
...52) and as to section 200 of the Labor Law (Holgerson v. South 45th St. Garage, 16 A.D.2d 255, 227 N.Y.S.2d 195, affd. 12 N.Y.2d 1011, 239 N.Y.S.2d 134, 189 N.E.2d 628) and would be proper as to section 241 (subd. 6) of the Labor Law if a violation of that statute does not impose absolute l......
-
Gonnerman v. Huddleston
...A.D.2d 1014, 557 N.Y.S.2d 584, quoting Holgerson v. South 45th St. Garage, 16 A.D.2d 255, 258, 227 N.Y.S.2d 195, affd. 12 N.Y.2d 1011, 239 N.Y.S.2d 134, 189 N.E.2d 628). Thus, Labor Law § 241(6) extends to areas where materials or equipment are being readied for use ( see Adams v. Alvaro Co......
-
Gugliemini v. Conigliaro
...284 App.Div. 826, 132 N.Y.S.2d 110; Holgerson v. South 45th St. Garage, 16 A.D.2d 255, 227 N.Y.S.2d 195, affd. 12 N.Y.2d 1011, 239 N.Y.S.2d 134, 189 N.E.2d 628). But here plaintiff worked for two weeks, without attempting to have the truck repaired after knowledge of the danger, before the ......