Mikaloros v. Stamatouras
| Decision Date | 31 March 1965 |
| Citation | 206 N.E.2d 62,348 Mass. 700 |
| Parties | Mary MIKALOROS v. Anthony STAMATOURAS. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
Frank P. Hurley, Boston, for the defendant.
Walter H. McLaughlin, Jr., Boston (Robert F. Murphy, Boston, with him), for the plaintiff.
Before WILKINS, C. J., and SPALDING, CUTTER, SPIEGEL and REARDON, JJ.
This is an action of tort to recover damages for personal injuries sustained by the plaintiff from a fall in the defendant's house. The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff, and the case is here on the defendant's exception to the denial of his motion for a directed verdict.
We state the evidence most favorable to the plaintiff. On the day of the accident, the plaintiff was the social guest of the wife of the defendant's tenant, who occupied an apartment on the first floor of a two family house owned by the defendant, who occupied the second floor apartment. In the course of her visit with the tenant's wife, the plaintiff also visited the defendant's mother-in-law in the second floor apartment. Returning to the first floor apartment at about 9:30 P. M. the plaintiff descended a back stairway leading to a hallway adjacent to the first floor apartment. The area was partly under new construction. It was dark at the foot of the stairs and in the hallway. From the last step, she 'went to step on the hall' floor. She 'thought there was another step and * * * [her] foot twisted and * * * [she] fell.' At the time of the creation of the tenancy and thereafter, the hallway was customarily illuminated at night by a light maintained by the defendant. This hallway was used by the tenant and the defendant.
From this evidence the jury could find that the hallway was a common passageway over which the defendant retained control; that the defendant had impliedly undertaken as a part of the letting to keep the hallway lighted and had negligently failed to perform this obligation; that the plaintiff was no longer the social guest of the defendant at the time of the accident, but the guest of the tenant's wife; and that there was a causal connection between the failure to light the hallway and the injury. Coan v. Adams, 332 Mass. 654, 656-657, 127 N.E.2d 198. Denny v. Burbeck, 333 Mass. 310, 312, 130 N.E.2d 542. Sullivan v. Hamacher, 339 Mass. 190, 193-195, 158 N.E.2d 301. Accordingly, there was no error in denying the defendant's motion for a directed verdict.
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Com. v. Thomas
...Tenant (Adams-Wadsworth 4th ed.), §§ 199--204; Schwartz, Lease Drafting in Massachusetts, §§ 3.17, 3.19. See also Mikaloros v. Stamatouras, 348 Mass. 700, 701, 206 N.E.2d 62. The cellar was not a part of Thomas's apartment or home. There he had no right to privacy, although (with other tena......
-
Harris v. Ellis Realty, Inc.
...was not a common passageway for general use (cf. Sullivan v. Hamacher, 339 Mass. 190, 193--195, 158 N.E.2d 301; Mikaloros v. Stamatouras, 348 Mass. 700, 701, 206 N.E.2d 62), did not extend to its use at night as an entrance to another apartment by a tenant feeling his way in the dark (see P......
-
Hall v. Winfrey
...jury and ... it was properly left to them for their determination." Id., at 194-95, 158 N.E.2d 301; see also Mikaloros v. Stamatouras, 348 Mass. 700, 701, 206 N.E.2d 62, 63 (1965) (jury could find causal connection between failure to light hallway and the plaintiff's injury); Ingersoll v. L......