Case Name: Mary Bencekovich, as Administratrix, etc., of Vinko Bencekovich, Deceased, Appellant, v. Elise W. Aubry, Respondent
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1937-05-28
Citations: 251 A.D. 268
Docket Number: 
Parties: Mary Bencekovich, as Administratrix, etc., of Vinko Bencekovich, Deceased, Appellant, v. Elise W. Aubry, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 251
Pages: 268–269

Head Matter:
Mary Bencekovich, as Administratrix, etc., of Vinko Bencekovich, Deceased, Appellant, v. Elise W. Aubry, Respondent.
First Department,
May 28, 1937.
Joseph R. Apfel of counsel [Louis Fleischer, attorney], for the appellant.
Frederick Mellor of counsel [William Butler, attorney], for the respondent.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
Plaintiff's evidence established prima facie that her intestate in entering on the roof extension was an invitee, not a mere licensee. With respect to the question of contributory negligence, the burden of proving which rested upon the defendant, there was presented a question of fact for the jury. Under the circumstances, therefore, the complaint was improperly dismissed.
The judgment appealed from should be reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event.
Present — Martin, P. J., O'Malley, Dore, Cohn and Callahan, JJ.; Martin, P. J., dissents and votes to affirm.
Judgment reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.