Quinn v. Staten Island Rapid Transit Railway Co.

• Court: New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
• Writing for the Court: POUND
• Citation: Quinn v. Staten Island Rapid Transit Ry Co., 224 N.Y. 493, 121 N.E. 340 (N.Y. 1918)
• Decision Date: 19 November 1918
• Parties: JOHN QUINN, Appellant, v. THE STATEN ISLAND RAPID TRANSIT RAILWAY COMPANY, Respondent.

224 N.Y. 493

121 N.E. 340

QUINN

v.STATEN ISLAND RAPID TRANSIT RY CO.

Court of Appeals of New York.

Nov. 19, 1918.

Appeal from Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

Action by John Quinn against the Staten Island Rapid Transit Railway Company. From a judgment of the Appellate Division (170 App. Div. 509,156 N. Y. Supp. 568), reversing a judgment of the Supreme Court entered on verdict of a jury in plaintiff's favor, plaintiff appeals. Reversed, and new trial granted.

Chase, Collin, and Cuddeback, JJ., dissenting.

1. WHARVES k21-PERSONAL INJURIES-LIABILITY OF OWNER.

One who maintains a private pier for the loading of barges with coal is bound to keep it in reasonably safe condition for those employed in such business.

2. WHARVES k21-SAFETY OF PREMISES-LIABILITY TO LICENSEES.

If a barge captain injured by falling through an unguarded opening in a private pier was on the premises for his own convenience merely, he was a bare licensee, and could not recover.

3. WHARVES k21-SAFETY OF PREMISES-DUTY TO INVITEES.

If a barge captain, injured in falling through an unguarded opening in a private pier, was there by invitation or on lawful business of interest to both parties, he was an invitee, to whom the owner of the pier owed the duty of exercising reasonable care and prudence, measured by the circumstances of which he was aware.

4. WHARVES k21-SAFETY OF PREMISES-INVITEES-‘LABYRINTH.’

Where a barge captain on his way from his barge to attend religious services on shore in the evening was injured by falling into an unguarded opening in a private pier, filled with pillars spaced at regular intervals, and not, as was contended, in the form of a labyrinth, which is a place of winding passages, the jury might find from the construction of a walk on the pier that plaintiff was invited to use it for purpose of going ashore.

George F. Hickey, of New York City, for appellant.

Lyle H. Hall, of New York City, for respondent.

POUND, J.

Plaintiff was the captain of a coal barge. The barge was sent to defendant's dock at St. George, Staten Island, to be loaded. It was lying there over Sunday when the accident in question occurred. The dock is a large double-deck structure extending 760 feet from the shore line. It is 46 feet wide from the outer end to a point inshore 430 feet, where it gradually narrows down to 21 feet. The upper part of the structure was used by the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Company. Coal trains came over it to deliver coal through chutes to barges moored below. The lower part is about 11 feet above the surface of the water at low tide. It sustains the upper part by means of a flooring and clusters of columns which are built upon 12-inch timbers running across the pier at 12-foot intervals and projecting 8 inches above the floor. The lower part was also used by the railroad employés and by the deckhands, owners, captains, mates, or any one on the barges to pass to and from the shore and their boats. One may walk from the outer end to the shore, but where the pier narrowed a 4-foot walkway was constructed on each side of an unguarded opening. In the evening, while on his way from his barge to the shore in the dark for the purpose of attending church services, plaintiff fell into the opening down a distance of 10 or 12 feet, and sustained injuries. No other convenient way to go ashore existed. He recovered a verdict in the trial court, but the Appellate Division dismissed his complaint on the ground that the open hole concealed by the darkness was a danger which he was bound to avoid.

[1][2][3] This was not a public pier, open to all persons, like a highway. It was a pier to which barges were invited to make fast in order to receive coal. Defendant was bound to keep it in reasonably safe condition for those employed in that business. Swords v. Edgar, 59 N. Y. 28, 17 Am. Rep. 295;Newall v. Bartlett, 114 N. Y. 399, and cases cited on page 404, 21 N. E. 990. In the darkness of the night the opening was a hidden peril. It is urged that plaintiff's business did not take...