Silva v. American Irving Savings Bank
| Decision Date | 22 January 1970 |
| Citation | 257 N.E.2d 283,309 N.Y.S.2d 33,26 N.Y.2d 727 |
| Parties | , 257 N.E.2d 283 Celia A. SILVA, Appellant, v. AMERICAN IRVING SAVINGS BANK, Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff-Respondent, v. BRADLEY CLEANING CONTRACTORS CORP., Third-Party Defendant-Respondent. |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, 31 A.D.2d 620, 295 N.Y.S.2d 366.
Robert M. Ginsberg, New York City, for plaintiff-appellant.
Reid, Devlin, Grubbs & Jackness, New York City (John M. Cunneen, New York City, of counsel), for defendant-respondent.
Katz & Gantman, New York City, for third party defendant-respondent. Depositor brought action against bank for injuries sustained in fall on floor of bank, on ground that bank floor was slippery because of wax which had been applied by independent contractor, and the bank joined the independent contractor as a third-party defendant. The wax had been applied on Monday night, and the fall of the depositor occurred on Thursday. The floor was rubberized tile. The depositor testified that after the accident she noticed pieces of wax on the floor, that the floor was shiny, and that there were marks on the floor leading to her heels, and that there was wax on her heels, shoes, stockings, and coat, and most of the wax was on her left heel. The bank introduced evidence that 20 or 30 people had walked on the floor before the depositor had her accident.
The Supreme Court, New York County, Flynn, J., rendered a judgment adverse to the depositor, and she appealed.
The Appellate Division affirmed the judgment and held that the depositor did not establish actionable negligence on part of bank either in application of the wax or the maintenance of the floor, and that the depositor did not show that bank had prior notice or should have had notice of the allegedly dangerous condition. Capozzolia, J., dissented on ground that testimony of depositor established a prima facie case.
The depositor appealed to the Court of Appeals, contending that evidence was sufficient to raise a question concerning alleged negligence of bank, and that even if the Court of Appeals agreed with the majority of the Appellate Division, the action should be remanded for a new trial in the interest of justice, and that testimony of bank's officer as to when the waxing was done should not be considered on the issue of whether the depositor made out a prima facie case. The bank contended in the Court of Appeals that depositor failed to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Thomassen v. J & K Diner, Inc.
...& Co., supra, at 292, 109 N.Y.S. 703; see also, Silva v. American Irving Sav. Bank, 31 A.D.2d 620, 295 N.Y.S.2d 366, affd 26 N.Y.2d 727, 309 N.Y.S.2d 33, 257 N.E.2d 283; Hildebrand v. Kazmierczak, 25 A.D.2d 603, 267 N.Y.S.2d The majority, in deciding that vicarious liability may be imposed ......
-
Caicedo v. Sanchez
...637, 479 N.Y.S.2d 509, 468 N.E.2d 691 [1984];Silva v. American Irving Sav. Bank, 31 A.D.2d 620, 295 N.Y.S.2d 366 [1st Dept.1968],affd.26 N.Y.2d 727, 309 N.Y.S.2d 33, 257 N.E.2d 283 [1970] ). Proof that a floor is “inherently slippery,” standing alone, is insufficient to support a cause of a......
-
Haman v. Humble Oil & Refining Co.
...5 Warren, Negligence, § 5.77, pp. 596--97; Silva v. American Irving Savings Bank, 31 A.D.2d 620, 295 N.Y.S.2d 366, aff'd, 26 N.Y.2d 727, 309 N.Y.S.2d 33, 257 N.E.2d 283. Accordingly, since Humble neither had notice or was the cause of the condition, nor did it undertake to do anything in an......
-
Diehr v. Association for Retarded Citizens of Chemung County
...at 1039, 399 N.Y.S.2d 205, 369 N.E.2d 761; Silva v. American Irving Sav. Bank, 31 A.D.2d 620, 295 N.Y.S.2d 366, affd 26 N.Y.2d 727, 309 N.Y.S.2d 33, 257 N.E.2d 283). Purolator's motion for summary judgment, insofar as it sought dismissal of the third-party complaint, should have been ORDERE......