Luftig v. Steinhorn
| Decision Date | 20 May 1965 |
| Citation | 16 N.Y.2d 568,260 N.Y.S.2d 840,208 N.E.2d 784 |
| Parties | , 208 N.E.2d 784 Charles LUFTIG, Appellant v. Abe STEINHORN, doing business as Grand Mountain Hotel, Respondent. |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, 21 A.D.2d 760, 250 N.Y.S.2d 354.
Guest at resort hotel brought action against owner of hotel for injuries sustained by guest when his foot went into hole in left field of softball field maintained by hotel while guest and other guests were playing ball. A witness called by the guest testified that the general condition of the left field was pretty bad and that there were quite a few holes in the left field and that the holes were obvious. Another witness of the guest testified that there was holes all over the outfield, and that it was a pasture.
The Supreme Court, Special and Trial Term, Bronx County, Lawrence J. Peltin, J., entered a judgment on a verdict for the guest, and the owner appealed.
The Appellate Division reversed the judgment on the law, dismissed the complaint, and held that the guest had an obligation to use reasonable care for his own safety and that electing to play ball on a field in condition described by witnesses constituted assumption of risk and made guest guilty of contributory negligence.
The guest appealed to the Court of Appeals.
O'Hagan & Reilly, New York City (Henry J. O'Hagan, New York City, of counsel), for respondent.
Order affirmed, without costs.
All concur.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Maddox v. City of New York
...854, 225 N.E.2d 547, affg. 24 A.D.2d 493, 261 N.E.2d 494 [window in close proximity to ping-pong table] ); Luftig v. Steinhorn, 16 N.Y.2d 568, 260 N.Y.S.2d 840, 208 N.E.2d 784, affg. 21 A.D.2d 760, 250 N.Y.S.2d 354 [hole in a baseball field] ); and Lobsenz v. Rubinstein, 283 N.Y. 600, 28 N.......
-
Morell v. Peekskill Ranch, Inc.
...dangerous condition, which was not open and obvious (cf. Luftig v. Steinhorn, 21 A.D.2d 760, 250 N.Y.S.2d 354, affd. 16 N.Y.2d 568, 260 N.Y.S.2d 840, 208 N.E.2d 784). Under the circumstances, where the evidence permits rational inferences leading to a conclusion of negligence on the defenda......
-
Stevens v. Central School Dist. No. 1 of Town of Ramapo
...Amusement Co., 250 N.Y. 479, 482, 166 N.E. 173, 174; Luftig v. Steinhorn, 21 A.D.2d 760, 250 N.Y.S.2d 354, affd. 16 N.Y.2d 568, 260 N.Y.S.2d 840, 208 N.E.2d 784; Speigel v. Jewish Community Center, 24 A.D.2d 926, 264 N.Y.S.2d 771). Basketball is a sport which requires those who participate ......
-
Woodford v. Hilton Hotels Corp.
... ... See, e.g., Luftig v. Steinhorn, 21 A.D.2d 760, 250 N.Y.S.2d 354, 355 (1964) (holding that resort hotel not liable to plaintiff for injuries incurred after plaintiff, ... ...