Sheehan v. North Country Cmty. Hosp.

• Decision Date: 09 March 1937
• Citation: 273 N.Y. 163,7 N.E.2d 28
• Court: New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
• Parties: SHEEHAN v. NORTH COUNTRY COMMUNITY HOSPITAL et al.

273 N.Y. 163

7 N.E.2d 28

SHEEHAN

v.NORTH COUNTRY COMMUNITY HOSPITAL et al.

Court of Appeals of New York.

March 9, 1937.

Action by Catherine Sheehan against the North Country Community Hospital and another. From a judgment of the Appellate Division (248 App.Div. 632, 289 N.Y.S. 756), affirming a judgment on a verdict for plaintiff, named defendant appeals.

The answer of defendant-appellant, in addition to denying various allegations of the complaint, set up as a compelte defense that it was a charitable corporation conducting a hospital for the benefit of the public and not for any private gain or return; that all the funds received by it were at all times held in trust for the charitable purposes for which it was organized; that it had never been run for the profit of its directors or trustees or of those who had given funds for its purposes; that it had no capital stock, paid no dividends upon sums contributed, and paid no salaries except to employees for services rendered; and that no financial benefit of any kind accrued to its directors or organizers; and appellant argued that, in consequence thereof, it was not liable for personal injuries sustained by its beneficiaries through the negligence of its servants.

Affirmed. Appeal from Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second department.

Richards W. Hannah and William A. Earl, both of New York City, for appellant.

Louis G. Hart, Jr., of New York City, for respondent.

LOUGHRAN, Judge.

Plaintiff, who had been a paying patient in a hospital of the defendant-appellant, a charitable corporation, was being removed in its ambulance to her home. Negligence of the driver brought the ambulance into collision with another vehicle and the plaintiff suffered injuries for which she had a judgment which has been affirmed. On these facts there is squarely presented for the first time in this court the question whether a charitable institution (not itself in default in the performance of any nondelegable duty) should be declared exempt from liability to a beneficiary for personal harm caused by the negligence of one acting as its mere servant or employee. Cf. Schloendorff v. Society of New York Hospital, 211 N.Y. 125, 105 N.E. 92,52 L.R.A.(N.S.) 505, Ann.Cas.1915C, 581.

The case for immunity must rest on the hypothesis that a recipient of the benefit impliedly waives any claim for damages resulting from torts in the administration of a charity, a theory that would be inapplicable were the plaintiff a stranger to this hospital. See Hordern v. Salvation Army, 199 N.Y. 233, 238-240,92 N.E. 626, 32 L.R.A.(N.S.) 62, 139 Am.St.Rep. 889; Hamburger v. Cornell University, 240 N.Y. 328, 329-340, 148 N.E. 539, 42 A.L.R. 955;Johnsen v. Staten Island Hospital Inc., 271 N.Y. 519, 2 N.E.(2d) 674;Kellogg v. Church Charity Foundation, 128 App.Div. 214, 218,112 N.E. 566. A prop may be found in the consideration that to compel payment of damages to a beneficiary would be to limit charitable activities and to dry up the...