Rom v. Huber
| Decision Date | 08 March 1920 |
| Docket Number | No. 90.,90. |
| Parties | ROM v. HUBER. |
| Court | New Jersey Supreme Court |
Appeal from Supreme Court.
Action by Martin Rom against Frank Huber. Judgment for defendant affirmed by Supreme Court (108 Atl. 361), and plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.
Isidore Kalisch, of Newark, for appellant.
Theodore McC. Marsh, of Newark, for respondent.
The only circumstance that requires remark from us is the plaintiff's contention that the defendant was liable for the negligence of his servant, and that in such a case the rule of Schnatterer v. Bamberger, 81 N. J. Law, 558, 79 Atl. 324, 34 L. R. A. (N. S.) 1077, Ann. Cas. 1912D, 139, is not applicable. The plaintiff's proposition is legally correct. The answer is that given in substance by the trial judge. There was no evidence that the soap on the floor, if indeed there was soap, was due to the negligence of any servant of the defendant. The evidence was that soap gets on the floor of the scrub room where patrons of the bath are rubbed by the attendants and might, by contact with the feet, be sent to the door of the steam room where Rom fell. There is nothing in this to show negligence. The occasional fall of pieces of soap on the floor is inevitable, and as patrons went from one room to another we cannot assume that the only persons whose feet might have sent the soap through the door, if that was the fact, were employes of the defendant. There is no evidence that it was impelled by the foot of the defendant or his agents, or that it might not have been by customers of the bath. Let the judgment be affirmed, with costs.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hart v. Emery, Bird, Thayer Dry Goods Co.
... ... constantly inspect merchandise similarly displayed. This ... would constitute an unreasonable burden." [See, also, ... Jenson v. S. H. Kress & Co. (Utah), 87 Utah 434, 49 ... P.2d 958; Sherlock v. Strouss-Hirshberg Co. (Ohio), ... 132 Ohio St. 35, 4 N.E.2d 912; Rom v. Huber, 94 ... N.J.L. 258, 109 A. 504.] ... It is ... true that there was no one near the table at the time of the ... accident and there is no evidence that any customer had ... disarranged the awnings. Plaintiff says that there being no ... evidence that any customer handled the ... ...
-
Martin v. City of Asbury Park
...81 N. J. Law, 558, 79 A. 324, 34 L. R. A. (N. S.) 1077, Ann. Cas. 1912D, 139 Rom v. Huber, 93 N. J. Law, 360, 108 A. 361 affirmed 94 N. J. Law, 258, 109 A. 504; Maphet v. Hudson & Manhattan R. R. Co., 98 N. J. Law, 369, 119 A. 777; Bodine v. Goerke Co., 102 N. J. Law, 642, 133 A. 295; Stark......
- Bradford v. F. W. Woolworth Co
-
Coyne v. Mut. Grocery Co., Inc.
...241, 169 A. 687; Finnegan v. Goerke Co., 106 N. J. Law, 59, 147 A. 442; Rom v. Huber, 93 N. J. Law, 360, 108 A. 361, affirmed 94 N. J. Law, 258, 109 A. 504; Garland v. Furst Store, 93 N. J. Law, 127, 107 A. 38, 5 A. L. R. 275; Kalb v. Fisher, 139 A. 237, 5 N. J. Misc. 977, affirmed 105 N. J......