Case ID: ny_232/html/0518-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

John Holland, Appellant, v. Ernest M. Turner, Respondent.
    
      Negligence — contractor engaged in altering building not liable to employee of another contractor on the same work who while walking over joists from which flooring has been necessarily removed falls owing to tipping of one of the joists.
    
    
      Holland v. Turner, 189 App. Div. 566, affirmed.
    (Argued October 14, 1921;
    decided October 28, 1921.)
    Appeal from a judgment entered November 14, 1919, upon an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department reversing a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict and directing a dismissal of the complaint in an action to recover for personal injuries alleged to have been occasioned through the negligence of defendant. The owner of the building 410-416 East Sixty-eighth street in the borough of Manhattan, made a contract with defendant, under which defendant was to change the location of a stairway leading from the first to the second floor. This involved the necessity of cutting out some joists on the second floor about twelve feet from the head of the stairway as it theretofore existed. In process of the work, the contractor had taken off the floor boards for the space of about twelve feet to the east of the floorway. He had also taken out some small cross pieces that are used between joists, for the main purpose of keeping the joists upright. Plaintiff was a plumber, also engaged under contract in the repair of this same building. He was on the second floor and had occasion to go to the first floor. He proceeded to walk across these joists from which the boards had been taken and from which the side supports had been taken, to the stairway, and one of the joists tipped over and fell to the floor below, causing him to fall, and thereby he sustained the injuries for which he sues. The Appellate Division held that plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence while there was no evidence of negligence on the part of defendant.
    
      Louis H. Solomon and Bernard Braun for appellant.
    
      Joseph F. Murray and Robert M. McCormick for respondent.
   Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: His cock, Ch. J., Cardozo, McLaughlin, Crane and Andrews, JJ. Dissenting: Hogan, J. Absent: Pound, J.