Case Name: Michael Paladine, Resp't, v. The Board of Supervisors of Westchester County, App'lts
Court: New York Supreme Court, General Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1888-02-13
Citations: 14 N.Y. St. Rep. 542
Docket Number: 
Parties: Michael Paladine, Resp’t, v. The Board of Supervisors of Westchester County, App’lts.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York State Reporter
Volume: 14
Pages: 542–543

Head Matter:
Michael Paladine, Resp’t, v. The Board of Supervisors of Westchester County, App’lts.
(Supreme Court, General Term, Second Department,
Filed February 13, 1888)
Mobs—Injuries committed ¿y—Damages for—When county not liable. The county in which property has been destroyed by a mob is not liable to the owner for damages, if the acts of the mob are the result of intoxication produced by liquor sold by him.
This is an appeal from a judgment rendered at the special term of Westchester county.
The facts sufficiently appear in the opinion.
W. H. Robertson, for app’lts; William G. Valentine, for resp’t.

Opinion:
Barnard, P. J.
There is proof tending to show, and which may be said to clearly establish the fact, that the mob or body of men engaged in the destruction of the plaintiff's shanty and contents were frenzied by strong drink. That the same was sold to the men without license (and license would be no protection) by the plaintiff. That the anger of the men was excited by a refusal to continue the sale longer, either because they had no more money or because they were getting too turbulent. That something like an hour afterwards these drunken and furious men returned to the shanty and burned it down, with its contents.
It seems to me that the true meaning of the statute is,, that if a mob be maddened by the voluntary and unlawful act of the claimant and the destruction of his property is the result, a good defense exists in favor of the city or county when sued for the injury occasioned by the mob. No action will be "supported "if such destruction or injury of property was occasioned, or in any manner aided, sanctioned or permitted by the carelessness or negligence of such person. If these men had destroyed the property of another person, such person could recover under the civil damage act. He should be made liable for his own property thus destroyed as against the county.
Judgment reversed and new trial granted, costs to abide event.
Pratt, J., concurs; Dykman, J., not sitting.