Case ID: ad_247/html/0462-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Ethel S. Wakeman, Respondent, v. The New York, New Haven and Hartford Railroad Company and Another, Appellants.
    First Department,
    May 16, 1936.
    
      Kenneth O. Moth-Smith of counsel [Clive C. Handy, attorney for The New York Central Railroad Company; John M. Gibbons, attorney for New York, New Haven and Hartford Railroad Company], for the appellants.
    
      Thomas J. O’Neill of counsel [Edward F. Cavanagh, Jr., with him on the brief], for the respondent.
   Per Curiam.

There is in this case no showing that the defendants had actual or constructive notice of the alleged dangerous and unsafe condition of the washroom floor which it is claimed was the cause of plaintiff’s fall and resultant injuries; nor is there any proof that the alleged dangerous condition was created by defendants’ own servants. In the circumstances, plaintiff failed to establish any cause of action against defendants. (Boettcher v. Dowling, 243 App. Div. 397; affd., 270 N. Y. 557.)

The judgment should accordingly be reversed, with costs, and the complaint dismissed, with costs.

Present — Martin, P. J., McAvoy, Glennon, Dore and Cohn, JJ.; Glennon and Dore, JJ., dissent and vote to affirm.

Judgment reversed, with costs, and complaint dismissed, with costs.