The sun., 1910-05-02

O6mBAsSun e RaGn MSuss EsspssS % InslI
ParunA


NJ Appallais DlVhion % Tie 8uprsma
Court q tAis State fer the BoooGd DepaSt.
msnt has iusl hnnasd down q deoisten vhleA
IN eject increases The protsctioa of tho pub
lIo from insult and assault: tho court hnlda
Presiding Justice HlFschberg diasentins
that where a woman after purchasing q
ticket snliillnG her 10 the priVilogsS Of
bathlna establishment b Wron9iully and
roughly removed By the ssrvant Of the bath
house ksspsr from the line ln which she q
waiting fos bathing suia her damages are
not limited 10 the amount paid Tor the ticfsl
but che h entitled 70 reooSsr on prtnciplss
analOsOus 70 thosa governing the obllga.
iions Of common oarTisFs and nnkeeperp
under similar circumstances. The court n
% holding afarms q judgment for $50 dan.
ages awarded after q trial In the Municipal
Court.
The plaintiff bought . ticket az q consy
Island hatAinG pavilion. which ticket "a.
titled her 70 a suit. the use of bath houss
and tho privilege Of bathing h the surf.
While waiting IN the line for her suit and
room hey another person, not In line, sought
70 be served first. Thu bath house attsndan,
gave the intruder tho prefsrenoe. despite
the rsmonstrance of the plaintiff against
thia favoritism Thsattendani then ordered
the plaintiff out Of thellne. at the same tims
calling her an offensive name the plaintiff
refussdand was straightwayforcioly elected
by q -bouncsr she thsgeupOn sued, no,
for assault but for breach Of cOnlraes. for
one reason because the Municipal Court IN
which her action was brought has no iurn-
dicsion over actions for assault.
The defence was that In no eveet could
there BE- q recovery for more than 2b cents.
the price Of the ticket. The Appellate pi.
vision, through Mr.. Justice Carr. diaasTess
With this view and citea - analo9ous cases
recent decisions Of the Court Of Appeals In
which railroad corporations were defend-
ants. and where the doctrine was laid down
in this state that . passenger might recover
damages from q STREET railroad company
for insulting language used By . conductor
Of q car 10 q woman passenger Who had
paid her fare and Was In process Of transit,
and that such damages were not limited 20
the amount Of the fare but should be CON.
penaatory a. % the humiliation and indigniiy
inflicted upon the passenger and for her IN
jured feelings.
The court shows how this doctrine has
been extended more recently IN this State
20 hotels. citing the decision Of De Wolf W
Ford. ias n. Y. ssf. In which the COuTt Of
Appeals said among other thinEs:
one of the things which . gusst for hire -
puble Inn has the night n insist upoa Il reapsetfu
and decent treatment a. ihe hands 81 tAe inn-
kespsr and his ssFvanis mat b an sassaual
part of ne coAtEAet. whshsT Il 10 express % In
pied This right Of me guest necessarily implss
an obHgauon on the part Of me innkespsT thaa
neither he nor his servants util aouss a. Insult
the ruest og indulge In any oOnduet o. speech
that may unnecessarily bring upon him phyaeal
discomfort or distress Of mind. Ths innkeepsl.
n "a true. IL not an insurer of ths safety, eon
venlsnce OF connfori of she guest But the former
ls bsund v exercise Feaaonsble oars mat neithsT
he nor his servants shall ~ uRclvi harhh oT cruel
ueatment destroy or minimize the comiort con.
venisnoe and peace Which the latter you'd oEdi-
naFily enjoy n the inn we're properly cOndueosd.
due allowance aluays being made for ne STads
Of the Inn and hs character of ne aeoomnaoda-
toa vhich II ~ designed 10 afford.
The Appellate Division 10 the bath house
case holds BY vote Of four TO one that the
same rule of compensatory damages ahouid
apply % In the cases Of public carrier and
innkeeper the court also having In mind
the case Of Smith ". Leo. % Hun. ia. where
damages beyond the price Of q ticket we're
awarded 20 9 person elected without good
cause from q dancing academy.